constructing transformative experiences through …/67531/metadc9919/m2/1/high_res_d/... · in...
TRANSCRIPT
APPROVED:
Mary M. Harris, Major Professor Leslie Patterson, Minor Professor Ronald Wilhelm, Committee Member and
Program Coordinator for Curriculum and Instruction
Jerry R. Thomas, Dean of the College of Education
Michael Monticino, Interim Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies
CONSTRUCTING TRANSFORMATIVE EXPERIENCES THROUGH PROBLEM
POSING IN A HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH RESEARCH PROJECT
Carol L. Revelle, B.A., M. Ed.
Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS
May 2009
Revelle, Carol L. Constructing transformative experiences through problem
posing in a high school English research project. Doctor of Philosophy (Curriculum and
Instruction), May 2009, 222 pp., 9 tables, 12 figures, references, 123 titles.
This dissertation chronicles my search to engage high school English students in
inquiry as part of a formal research process. The perspective of critical literacy theory is
used to describe the four phases of the problem posing process in shaping student
research and action. Grounded in Freire’s approach and consistent with Dewey and
others who advocate inquiry, action and relevance, Wink’s process is built into the
instructional plan described in this study. Because of the real-life context of the
classroom and the complex social phenomena being considered, a case study
methodology was utilized in which multiple sources of data converged to develop the
themes. Data sources included the work and artifacts of ten students in a tenth grade
English class during the spring semester of 2008. The analysis focuses on the supports,
the constraints and the impact of problem posing on the high school research
assignment. The analysis, findings, and conclusions contribute to the literature in three
areas: audience, reflection and grading.
ii
Copyright 2009
by
Carol L. Revelle
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We don't accomplish anything in this world alone ... and whatever happens is the result of the whole tapestry of one's life and all the weavings of individual threads from one to another that creates something. – Sandra Day O’Conner
As the threads that hold this dissertation were woven together, I felt the helpful
and artistic hands of many people assisting in the completion of this tapestry. First, I
would like to thank Dr. Mary Harris for being both an honest and supportive major
professor. Her steadfast attention to detail in our multitude of drafts, and her faithful
belief in my abilities encouraged me to complete this process. I would also like to thank
Dr. Gloria Contreras, Dr. Leslie Patterson, and Dr. Ron Wilhelm for serving on my
committee. As my minor professor, Dr. Patterson provided the foundation for my studies
in literacy, and Dr. Wilhelm showed me, in his research courses, how to capture and
interpret various forms of information. I am a better researcher, but I am also a better
person because of my experiences with the members of my committee.
My research would not be possible if not for the many years of picking up the
kids, fixing dinner, going to the grocery store, and running the laundry so “mom could
work on her paper.” I would like to thank my husband, Niel. It is impossible to imagine
how I could have completed this process without his support and unyielding assurance
that I would accomplish my goals. I am also thankful to my daughters, Hope and
Hannah for their perspectives and insights. I would also like to thank my parents, who
have supported me though they never had the educational opportunities that I have
enjoyed, and my mother-in-law and father-in-law who always remembered to ask how
my paper was coming along. I am very fortunate to be so well loved.
iv
I am also fortunate that at 5:30 in the evening, every other week, my dissertation
writing group, Dr. Brian Earle, Terisa Pearce, Dr. Jennifer Roberts and Dr. Dara
Williams-Rossi came together for support and feedback. This group provided critical
comments and questions, helpful suggestions, and sometimes a shoulder to cry on, as
we worked together on one of the hardest challenges of our lives.
In addition, there are numerous friends and colleagues that have helped me
along the journey. First, I would like to thank the principal at my school for allowing me
to conduct research in my classroom for both my pilot study and this study. I would also
like to acknowledge Holly Hubenak, Kimberlea Jackson, Martha Medlock, and Laura
Sansone for their contributions, mostly emotional, for the last two years. Finally, to my
participants, I am thankful to both the students and their parents for agreeing to allow
the students’ work to be collected, analyzed and published. Without their work, I
wouldn’t have a study.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................vii LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................ viii Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 Theory............................................................................................. 2 Research Questions........................................................................ 3 Methodology ................................................................................... 4 Definition of Terms.......................................................................... 5 Limitations and Delimitations of the Study ...................................... 8 Researcher Assumptions .............................................................. 10 Significance of the Study............................................................... 11 Structure of the Report.................................................................. 12
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 13
Introduction ................................................................................... 13 Introduction to the High School Research Paper .......................... 13 Student Research and Problem Posing Praxis ............................. 20 Critical Literacy Theory ................................................................. 29 Summary....................................................................................... 45
3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 48
Case Study Methodology .............................................................. 49 Instructional Methodology ............................................................. 69 Problem Posing Phases in Student Research .............................. 70 Summary of Methodology ............................................................. 82
4. FINDINGS................................................................................................ 84
Student Research in the Classroom.............................................. 84 The Participants ............................................................................ 85
vi
Guiding Questions......................................................................... 97 Support for Problem Posing .......................................................... 98 Constraints to Problem Posing.................................................... 122 Summary..................................................................................... 143 The Facilitated Research Experience ......................................... 144 Summary..................................................................................... 159
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................... 161
Rationale for the Study................................................................ 161 Summary of Findings .................................................................. 163 Conclusions and Recommendations........................................... 172 Recommendations ...................................................................... 179 Reflections on the Research Experience .................................... 186 Summary..................................................................................... 188
Appendices
A. RESEARCH QUESTION CHECKLIST .................................................. 191 B. INFORMED CONSENT FORM.............................................................. 193 C. STUDENT ASSENT FORM................................................................... 196 D. SUPERSIZE ME: VIDEO GUIDE........................................................... 198 E. INTERNET CHECKLIST........................................................................ 201 F. RESEARCH DOUBLE COLUMN NOTES ............................................. 203 G. RESEARCH SUMMARY RUBRIC......................................................... 205 H. MULTI-GENRE RESEARCH PROJECT, PRESENTATION AND
EVALUATION ........................................................................................ 207 I. CODE GRAPHIC ................................................................................... 210
WORKS CITED........................................................................................................... 212
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1. Participant Demographic Characteristics............................................................ 53
2. Use of Sources to Answer Guiding Questions.................................................... 57
3. Peer Journal Literature and Prompts.................................................................. 71
4. Assignment Timeline .......................................................................................... 80
5. Problem Board List ........................................................................................... 109
6. Early Purpose Identified ................................................................................... 117
7. Participant Plans for Action............................................................................... 119
8. Participant Topic Choices................................................................................. 134
9. What? So What? Now What? and Sub Questions............................................ 139
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1. The problem posing process .............................................................................. 23
2. Freire’s problem posing ...................................................................................... 23
3. Transformative pedagogy................................................................................... 24
4. The third idiom.................................................................................................... 28
5. Audience types ................................................................................................... 41
6. Levels of optimism.............................................................................................. 44
7. Problem posing data collection........................................................................... 61
8. Framework for data collection............................................................................. 63
9. Convergence of multiple sources of evidence .................................................... 65
10. Completed problem board ................................................................................ 110
11. Audience proximity ........................................................................................... 121
12. Problem posing process with reflections added................................................ 176
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Outside the university, we don’t find the subject – it finds us. And the way that the subject finds us is as a problem that needs to be solved. I would say, then, that out there, research is very much problem driven… the research is oriented to solving a problem, and the purpose of the research document is to present the solution to this problem. Thus, the focus is on research, and not the paper (Shook, 1988, p. 5).
With a clear focus on bringing rigor and relevance to the English classroom,
teachers expect students to produce work, as described by the International Center for
Leadership in Education, in “real-world unpredictable situations” (2006). To make the
research paper relevant in the secondary English classroom, teachers include the use
of technology to gather and present information (Ballenger, 2007; Guinee & Eagleton,
2006; How to Write a Great Research Paper, 2004; Hunt & Hunt, 2006; Liepolt, 2005),
increase the frequency of research in classroom projects (Pfaffinger, 2006), and change
the look of the research paper itself by allowing the use of first person and multigenre
products (Borsheirm & Petrone, 2006; Dickson, DeGraff, & Foard, 2002; Luther, 2006;
Lyman, 2006; Mancina, 2005; Perry, 2003; Styslinger, 2006). However, as Shook
explains, students must relate their research to personal experiences, and the topics
should be problem driven to be more applicable in the real world because in the real
world, research serves a purpose (Shook, 1988).
It was my desire to “create the conditions under which we can develop
democratic voices at all levels of schooling so that together we can engage in an active
public life” (Shannon, 1993) that first led me to consider the research paper as a
potential vehicle for social action. This problem found me in my English classroom, and
I pursued it for my students and for myself as a researcher. I enlisted the assistance of
2
Wink’s problem posing process which encourages teachers to engage their students in
problem posing to “[bring] interactive participation and critical inquiry into the
established, prescribed curriculum” (Wink, 1997, p. 48).
This dissertation chronicles my search for a way to engage my students in inquiry
as they participated in a school-based, formal research process. Using the perspective
of critical literacy theory and an instructional plan that follows Wink’s (1997) problem
posing process, my students and I embarked on a journey to participate in a meaningful
research assignment. As the students sought out problems in their environment to
research and eventually pose solutions, I conducted research by collecting and
analyzing their work and artifacts to determine what were the supports and constraints
to the process and how the process supported their research assignment.
Theory
Critical literacy is a distinct theoretical and pedagogical field focused on
“identifying authentic social problems and ways of addressing these problems through
language and action” (Knobel, 2007, p. vii). The goal of critical literacy is to “use and
teach oppositional discourses so as to remake ourselves and our culture.” In this sense
critical literacy is both reflective and reflexive: reflective when the student questions
knowledge and reflexive in the reaction of challenging and acting against inequality
(Shor, 1997).
According to Shor, critical literacy is the dream of a new society “against the power
now in power”(1997, pp. 128-129). Feminist scholar, Rich, defined critical literacy as
“language used against fitting unexceptionably into the status quo” (1979, p. 14).
3
Anderson and Irvine determined that critical literacy is “learning to read and write as part
of the process of becoming conscious of one’s experience as historically constructed
within specific power relations,” (1993, p. 82) while Aronowitz and Giroux said “critical
literacy would make clear the connections between knowledge and power (1985, p.
132). Kfrertovics explained that “Critical literacy… points to providing participants not
merely with functional skills, but with the conceptual tools necessary to critique and
engage society along with its inequalities and injustices… made practical” (1985, p. 51),
and Knobel described critical literacy as “concerned with critiquing relationships among
language use, social practice, and power” (Knobel, 2007, p. vii). However the best
definition for connecting this field to the problem posing process at the heart of this
project is probably the one provided by Ohmann, who called critical literacy “literacy
from below,” where participants actively question the status quo and imagine solutions
(1996). This is what students are asked to accomplish when they begin with their own
experiences and work together to end with an action resulting from earlier phases of
problem posing (Wink, 1997).
Research Questions
In problem posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in progress, in transformation” (Freire, 1970, p. 83). In problem posing, the instructional model chosen for this study, actions take
place after the problems are named. Students then work toward solutions by moving
outside the classroom into the world (Wink, 1997). So problem posing is recursive
because it starts with inquiry and ends with actions that often lead to new questions and
4
new actions, and through language, the students generate new knowledge (Wink,
1997).
The purpose of this study was to develop a case to confirm, refine, or elaborate
the supports and constraints to learning and the possible learning of the participants in
this single case study as they worked through Wink’s (1997) problem posing process
that was embedded in their research assignment. The research question for this study
were What were the supports and constraints to problem posing as evidenced by the
work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project?
And What did the work of participants suggest that they learned from this experience?
To answer these questions, data were analyzed using the following guiding questions:
1. What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project? 2. What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project? 3. What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
These questions were used to frame the analysis and develop the themes in the data
for the analysis, findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Methodology
Because of the real-life context of the classroom and the complex social
phenomena being considered, this study lent itself well to a case study. According to
Yin (1994), a case study is a comprehensive research strategy that incorporates data
collection and data analysis that move beyond a systematic design for conducting
5
research. For this study, the single case study design was chosen to “determine
whether a theory’s propositions [were] correct” (Yin, 1994, p. 13). In addition, a case
study protocol was designed to define procedures for the study.
Because of the case study approach, the use of multiple sources of data that
converge to develop the themes was important for improving the quality of the study.
Fortunately, case studies often contain a variety of evidence that is not present in other
strategies. An important advantage was the “[development] of converging lines of
inquiry, a process of triangulation … Thus any finding or conclusion in a case study
[was] more likely to be much more convincing and accurate if it [were] based on several
different sources of information” (1994, p. 92). In this study, triangulation was
accomplished by tapping a variety of data sources that corroborated the same theory.
This study included data from multiple sources including: participant journals, participant
writing, participant projects, participant reflections, participant interviews, class
instructions, lessons, and teacher notes.
Definition of Terms
A list of terms and their definitions as the words pertain to this study was
developed to improve the understanding of this study.
- Authentic audience: Different from an audience that can be a classmate or
the teacher, an authentic audience is the real world recipient of the action in
the problem posing process. The authentic audience is selected by the
participant as a person or group that could influence a change that could
improve or solve the problem identified.
6
- Constraint: Used in the second guiding question, it is identified with a cause
of restraint or an identified area for improvement in participant work.
- Naming: “[N]aming is talking honestly and openly about one’s experiences
with power and without power. … Naming is when we articulate a thought that
traditionally has not been discussed by the minority group, or the majority
group. Naming takes place when the nondominant group tells the dominant
group exactly what the nondominant group thinks and feels about specific
social practices. To name is to take apart the complex relationships of ‘more’
and ‘less’ between the two groups” (Wink, 1997, p. 53).
- Participants: The students in this study who both acquired a parent consent
form and completed a student consent form to participate in this study.
- Problem posing: A process in which students have the opportunity to analyze
their environment critically and address identified problems through inquiry
and action. In this study, a specific problem posing process, developed by
Wink (1997) is utilized.
- Praxis: The practice of theory in a practical setting and the results of the
practice on theory. In this study, the practice of the theory of critical literacy is
achieved by using the phases of problem posing while teaching the student
research assignment. According to Wink, “Praxis is the constant reciprocity of
our theory and our practice. Theory building and critical reflection inform our
practice and our action, and our practice and action inform our theory building
and critical reflection” (Wink, 1997, p. 48).
7
- Research: To help prevent the confusing use of the word research used to
represent the research done by the principal investigator in comparison with
the word research completed by my students as they proceed through the
phases of problem posing, the use of a descriptive adjective(s) occurs when
there is questionable text. The research of the students is referred to as
student research, secondary research, or high school research depending on
the requirements of the text. When research is used as a verb, care is taken
to identify the researcher.
- Reflection: The act of reconsidering an experience for the purpose of
connecting learning to the world beyond the classroom, reviewing a change in
beliefs, or modifying a process for better results on the next attempt.
- Secondary: Traditionally used to represent students in grades six through
twelve, in this study, secondary specifically refers to students in high school,
grades nine through twelve. The more specific use of the term high school is
also utilized in this document.
- Student: Used as a noun, this signifies students in a general sense, not the
students in this study who are referred to instead as participants. Used as an
adjective, it describes work created by students, such as student research.
- Support: Used in the first guiding question, it is identified with a cause of
success in participant work.
- Transformation: The goal for the students in this study was that they
experience a personal change as they saw that their social actions could
change the world.
8
Limitations and Delimitations of the Study
There are several limitations on the generalizations that can be made from the
findings in this study. The participants for this study were the students in my tenth
grade class that returned the signed consent form (n=10), and the experience of this
study was bound by their unique characteristics. The use of a case study methodology
and the sample size indicate that the analysis, findings, and conclusions contribute to
the literature of critical literacy theory but cannot be generalized to other settings.
Current events and the personal experiences of the participants influenced the
problems they chose and their interactions with the research in unique ways. Although
this produced variety that cannot be replicated, the process that the participants
followed and their interactions with the chosen subjects and audiences revealed themes
that are reported in Chapter 4.
Also, this study was conducted in my classroom. The benefits of this site, where I
am a teacher, included accessibility and the established rapport with the campus
administration. The arrangement was suitable for the me because the close proximity
reduced the amount of time needed to build relationships and to travel. Glesne called
this type of situation “backyard research” (2006). A teacher doing research in her own
class with the goal of improving the experience of students is productive because this
becomes a type of personal knowledge that improves a teacher’s performance, but
Glesne warned of potential ethical and political dilemmas (2006). She encouraged care
in understanding the parties that have a vested interest in the topic being researched
(Glesne, 2006). A political dilemma in this study was that the English department at this
school had a vested interest in the assignments they had previously developed and may
9
have perceived instructional deviation as a threat to the school’s curriculum. Care and
effort were made to assure that the students participating in this study fulfilled all of the
preexisting curricular requirements for the research unit used in the other teachers’
classes by what seemed to be common agreement. Care was also taken to have a
similar number of grades and similar grading standards to those employed by other
teachers. These considerations were embedded into the instructional design.
Since my primary role in this study’s setting was classroom teacher, there was a
barrier to collecting field notes from observations. My goal was not compromise
instruction for data collection, so the methodology used information collected from
student work as the primary source of data. Care was taken to assure that all student
artifacts were copied, collected, photographed, and recorded. Each of these artifacts
was converted, if possible, to a digital format by having the participants email their work
or through transcription. The digital copies were maintained in a case study database.
This led to another possible limitation of this study, the fact that the participants
were aware that their work would be evaluated for this study because of the signed
consent forms. This may have had the effect of improved performance with participants
who understood that their work would be considered by a larger audience. However, the
expectation of an authentic audience was an element of the problem posing process
used in this study, so in some ways this limitation was addressed by the methodology of
the study. However, as the participants came to realize that this study is the product of
their own teacher’s dissertation, it is unrealistic to expect that they were not more
careful with their work. Though a limitation to the study, this also acts, as described by
Miles and Huberman, as an opportunity for the participants to “act on the world instead
10
of being acted on” (1994, p. 9), so from this perspective it offers both challenges and
benefits.
Researcher Assumptions
As a researcher and participant in the classroom, I brought several assumptions
to this study. One starting assumption was that my value was centered on my role as
the teacher of all eighteen students in the classroom. Therefore, my first obligation was
to provide the best learning environment possible for my students. I was concerned
equally for those represented in the study and those who were not participants.
Although the lessons taught during the unit were written to highlight the problem posing
process, I would not have included any step of this instructional plan if I had not believe
that it would be a successful strategy for supporting student learning.
With this in mind, as a teacher, I had to assume that the problem posing process
itself would improve student engagement with research skills. I believed that when the
students had authentic opportunities to choose their topics and address a real audience,
as required by the problem posing process, they would have a successful learning
experience. I assumed that the students would all choose good topics and complete
each step as I supported their learning in the classroom with a clear instructional plan
and with my support as a classroom facilitator.
In addition, I had some trepidation about completing this research in my own
classroom. I assumed that by departing from the unit plan for my grade level provided
by the tenth grade team leader, I would jeopardize the support of my department and
have to defend my decision to diverge from the prescribed curriculum if challenged by a
11
parent or colleague. I was concerned about not being viewed as a team player.
Although the series of lessons that I rejected were created before I came to the school, I
understood that they were viewed as the standard curriculum. For the study, I tried to
assume an instructional stance that placed problem posing leading to social action on a
par with the established curriculum.
Significance of the Study
The analysis, findings, and conclusions of this study contribute to the literature of
critical literacy a description of the problem posing process framework used to guide the
research process in a secondary setting. There is limited research on the secondary
research paper (Ballenger, 1992), so the data collected and analyzed in this study
provide a unique glimpse into the participation of students in a research process, guided
by problem posing. This study also casts the topic in a theoretical framework that is
attractive to other English teachers (Boomer, 2000; Borsheirm & Petrone, 2006;
Caillouet, 2006; Christensen, 2000; Derrico, 2006; Fairbanks, 1989; Kaszyca &
Krueger, 1994; Luther, 2006; Mancina, 2005; McColley et al., 1988; Pegram, 2006;
Ruggieri, 2007; Shafer, 1999; Steineke, 2002; Williams, 1993). The results have some
potential for finding an audience in the English and language arts field as it contributes
to the literature of teachers working in the classroom as a case study of practice. The
classroom studies of teachers working in their classrooms are valued to the
practitioners in the English and language arts field (Burke, 2003; Gallagher, 2006; Jago
& Gardner, 1999; Steineke, 2002; Wilhelm, 2007).
12
Structure of the Report
The next four chapters address the literature that informed the study, the
research and instructional methodology employed, the findings, and the conclusions
and recommendations. The literature review begins with an introduction to the high
school research paper and is followed by a section on problem posing praxis that
connects the work of the high school research paper to critical literacy theory. Chapter
3, Methodology, is divided into two major sections. The first section describes the
application of the methodology chosen for this study, and the second section lays out
the instructional plan for implementing the problem posing process in the classroom.
Next, Chapter 4, Findings begins with an introduction of the participants followed by an
analysis organized around the three guiding questions that framed this study. The final
chapter, Conclusions and Recommendations is divided into three parts. The first part
shares the summary of the findings from the analysis, the second part shares the
conclusions drawn from the analysis, and the recommendations are made in the final
section of the chapter.
13
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This chapter presents literature whose topics fit like nesting dolls into a wider and
interconnected body of literature and theory. It begins with the “Introduction to the High
School Research Paper,” a review of literature on the high school research paper with a
focus on student research as social action and its implications for the research
assignment. The chapter then situates the body of literature about student research into
a section called “Student Research and Problem Posing Praxis” where the literature
concerning problem posing and praxis as understood in Freirean and Deweyan contexts
and by more modern theorists is shared. The discussion of problem posing praxis is
then set within a review of critical literacy theory in the final section of the chapter titled
“Critical Literacy Theory.”
Introduction to the High School Research Paper
Ballenger (1992) traced the history of the research paper as an assignment to the
American Civil War period. Before the Civil War, colleges were small and attended by
the upper class. Professors were religious leaders instead of specialists, and oral
rhetoric was preferred over writing. However, after the Civil War the enrollment in
colleges increased, and the American schools followed the German model of professors
who were specialists and researchers in a specific field. This led to the development of
departments in the colleges and to the increase of the assignment of the German
14
research report, complete with footnotes. With an objective and neutral tone, the
research paper became the standard for demonstration of knowledge among university
professors, then undergraduate students, and eventually, high school students (1992).
The research assignment first appeared in freshman composition books in the
1920s as an expository essay requiring note cards and library references. By the 1930s
the assignment had its own chapter in textbooks, which reflected elements of a
progressive educational approach by addressing utilitarian needs such as interviewing
and occupation surveys (Ballenger, 1992).
Ballenger discovered what he described as “a bibliography of over 200 articles on
teaching the research paper published between 1923 and 1980. Its compilers noted that
while the vast majority explored various approaches to teaching [a research paper], ‘few
were theoretical in nature or based on research, and almost none cited even one other
work on the subject’” (1992, p. 4; Ford, 1982, p. 84). His own survey of literature since
1980 suggested that little had changed since then (Ballenger, 1992). Ford (1982),
reflecting on the 1980s bibliography, concluded that there was a need for experts in the
field of research. Ballenger challenged English teachers to confront the problems found
in the student research assignment, including the common complaint that the instructors
seem more concerned about citation than content. He also sympathized with the plight
of English departments which are expected to teach the skills of conducting research for
all of the other departments in the institution (Ballenger, 1992).
Valuing the importance of teaching research, Ballenger called on his colleagues to
consider the selection of student generated topics and audiences as occasions for
encouraging students to produce better research papers. Ballenger determined that “the
15
confusion about the objective and subjective is one of the reasons research papers are
such a [problem]… It ignores the reason why someone would want to research anything
in the first place: curiosity” (Ballenger, 1992, p. 11). Reminiscent of Dewey (1938),
Ballenger (1992) saw that the best way to teach research essays was to connect
education to personal experiences by encouraging students to look for research topics
that make a difference in their lives.
Students who discover that research, and the ideas it generates, can make a difference in their lives will have learned why most people do it in the first place: to examine things that matter to people. Students are obviously most likely to see the worth of research if they ask questions that grow from their own experience. And they’ll also discover that it can change their minds about what they’ve seen or will see, a process that grafts new opinions on the old. (pp. 20 -21)
The benefits of successfully completing English research essays include meeting the
demand of an extended essay, the understanding of library skills, the ability to collect
information on a topic, and the opportunity for students to write on topics outside
themselves (Ballenger, 1992). As Dewey explained, the research process is “a
prolonged interaction of something issuing from the self with objective conditions, a
process in which both of them acquire a form and order they did not at first possess”
(1938, p. 65). Participating in research supports student learning when students make a
meaningful connection (Shook, 1988).
Coexisting with the goal of providing a meaningful research assignment for
student researchers, English teachers are pressured by other departments to teach the
skills of the research paper with an emphasis on finding relevant sources, embedding
them into papers, and including correct citations and bibliographies (Ballenger, 1992).
Ballenger explained that emphasis on form is the reason why many English teachers
value format over content (1992). A format driven emphasis in grading posits the
16
teacher as subject and student as object, so Shor suggested “narrative grading rather
than only number or letter grades, to encourage serious dialogue between student and
teacher about the quality of the work” (1992, p. 132). However, Shor recognized the
challenges of working in a school system that is centered on textbooks, standardized
tests, and a numeric grading system. He explained that “these traditional practices
restrict student-centered, dialogic, and participatory education” (p. 144). Elbow (2000)
explained that grades actually “undermine” the learning in the following ways:
- They lead many students to work more for the sake of the grade than for learning.
- They lead to an adversarial atmosphere; students often resent or even fight us about grades; many students no longer feel the teacher as ally in the learning process and try to hide what they don’t understand.
- They lead to a competitive atmosphere among students themselves. (p. 400)
Elbow added that the use of numeric grades is “untrustworthy” as “descriptors for
complex human performances” (p. 407). Instead he suggested using criteria because “it
helps students to engage in valid and productive self-evaluation…and it makes grades
more informative and useful” (pp. 714-715). As relevant grading strategies inform the
process, social action provides meaning to the research assignment.
Student Research for Social Action
Literature on the student research paper acknowledged that providing a critical
purpose for student researchers makes the assignment meaningful. According to Shor,
“the critical-democratic teacher invites and expects students to do research” (1992, p.
169). Shor proposed the research assignment be designed as a vehicle for social
change instead of following the traditional approach that utilizes a teacher selected topic
17
often tending, as Giroux (1997) explained, to disconnect students from their personal
environments and experiences. According to Shafer (1999), this disconnect between
school assignments and the students’ personal lives and experiences
. . . comes from writing assignments that fail to value the lives, cultures, and interests of the writers. Traditional research tends to subordinate these issues to lofty topics like ‘gun control,’ or ‘capital punishment,’ while the crime and domestic chaos in the writer's community are curiously ignored. (p. 46) Often ignored as well are the research skills that students bring to the classroom
from their personal lives. This can be developed into what Ruggieri (2007) called
information literacy. When the students are information literate, they have the ability to
“[identify] potential sources of information, [evaluate] and [organize] the information for
practical application, and [use] the information in critical thinking and problem solving”
(Coleman, 1994, p. 16). Information literate citizens are lifelong learners who have the
ability to use these skills to “meet job related and personal needs” (p. 17). In 1992, the
English Journal shared exercises to involve students in their civic responsibilities to
combat the perception of “apathy and passivity among adolescents… with present
involvement” ("Research with a Purpose," 1992, p. 59).
In a pedagogy of social action, teachers engage their students with their subject in a
meaningful way, meeting the needs of their self-discovered topic by developing
proposals for solutions and implementation (Shafer, 1999; Slack, 2001; Williams, 1993).
Students need a reason to research (Shafer, 1999; Slack, 2001; Williams, 1993) and an
opportunity to interact with the community for social reasons (Ballenger, 1992; Shook,
1988). In social-action research assignments, students are encouraged to find their
research topics in their own communities (Shor, 1992). In the United Kingdom, a
18
program called Six Approaches to Post 16 Citizenship (2007) has developed a
curriculum for teachers and students to engage in
citizenship research projects [that] are about having a positive effect on the quality of people’s lives. They are about seeking improvements, both for the individual and for public and political reasons. …It is especially important that citizenship research involves action of some kind, with the aim of bringing about change for the better. (p. 7).
This program encourages research assignments that both engage the students as
citizens and involves them in problem-solving that results in action. Social action
provides a purpose for completing student research. There are also benefits for
completing research including the increased ability to work with the chaos of real-world
problems.
Student Research for Form Finding and Form Creating
The challenge and work of the research assignment prepares students for the
unique and ambiguous challenges in life. Berthoff (1982) encouraged embracing variety
in instructional goals when she explained, “What we need to learn to teach are the uses
of chaos and the delights of form finding and form creating”(p. ix). Her position was that
students lived in a world of ambiguity, and the teachers provide the students an
opportunity to recognize this and apply it to their work in the classroom. The student
“plunges into an assignment, uses all of his resources, makes errors where he must,
and heeds the feedback” (Moffett, 1983, p. 199).
Cognitively speaking, a research assignment may be the most challenging
assignment given to the students each year (Wirtz, 2006). A task is cognitively complex
when it is not a routine task and requires two or more cognitive functions that are not
19
automatically performed (Marzano, 1991).To approach this challenge, students are
invited to embrace the chaos of the assignment to compose their products. The word
“composing,” conveys the idea of putting things together. Just as a musician puts
together music for an orchestra, just as an artist puts together colors and brush strokes
to create a masterpiece, so too an author puts together ideas in complementary and
contrasting ways to compose a piece of writing. For Berthoff (1982), “making sense of
the world is composing” (p. 10) and for the writer, composing requires “the mutual
dependence of language and thought, all the ways in which a word finds a thought and
a thought, a word” (p. 48). Motivation and relevance improve writing because authors
write better when they write their reality, and “Skills are learned – really learned – only
when there is a reason to learn them” (Berthoff, 1981, p.28). Moffett (1983) supports
this by saying that a student will “get interested in the subject to the extent that he can
make it relevant to his current needs” (p. 7).With an interesting play on words, Berthoff
(1990) called for writers to consider “thinking about thinking, for interpreting
interpretations, for knowing… knowledge” (p. 9). This metacognative focus requires
students to write to a variety of forms, to express a range of emotions, and to explain
the chaos. Indeed, writing “produces an external result, [so] it is a natural testing
instrument” (Moffett, 1988, p. 32). Reading and writing are communicative devices, “at
once personal and social activities: we can no more separate the individual and the
general aspects of meaning making” (Berthoff, 1990, p. 108). This description of the
imaginative classroom is in sharp contrast with the “reduced learning and living [in]
quantifiable components devoid of the aesthetic and narrative” (Pinar, 1998, p. 5). The
20
next section of this chapter introduces problem posing praxis as an approach to
transformation of the research assignment.
Student Research and Problem Posing Praxis
The personal and social activities of students provide engaging topics for their
research. Shor (1992), a composition and rhetoric professor who collaborated with
Freire on the topic of critical pedagogy, argued that it is important for school teachers to
interact with students on research projects organized around student culture and
learning because the more “students research knowledge and their conditions, the more
developmental the class can become” (p. 171). Indeed, Shor encouraged “Freire-based
programs” such as problem posing because it would help “the curriculum avoid
becoming teacher-centered or academically abstract” (p. 171). Christensen (2000), an
English teacher and author of several books on critical literacy, shared that students
should be working with large social issues that are personally meaningful. Boomer
(2000) argued that teachers either help students to find the social action topics in their
daily lives, or we do not help students find these issues. A decision to ignore social
issues is a decision not to engage. Such a decision represents a rejection of the
students’ need to work with these issues.
The next three sections of this paper summarize the literature on three areas of
praxis. The first section explains the what of problem posing praxis. The second
section,” The Praxis of Critical Literacy”, offers the why of problem posing praxis, and
the third section, “The Third Idiom”, describes a goal of problem posing praxis.
21
The Problem Posing Praxis
Problem posing, developed by Freire for adult literacy and by Dewey in
progressive education, is a method of communication that leads to social interaction.
The teacher begins by listening to the students to determine their concerns. This is
followed by a directed code or prompt, so the students may look objectively at their own
experiences and concerns on a specific topic (Freeman & Freeman, 1992; Roberts,
2000; Shor, 1992). Problem posing “responds to the essence of consciousness –
intentionality – rejects communiqués and embodies communication. It epitomizes the
special characteristic of consciousness: being conscious of, not only as intent on
objects but as turned in upon itself… consciousness as consciousness of
consciousness” (Freire, 1970, p. 79).
“In problem posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically
the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come
to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in progress, in transformation”
(Freire, 1970, p. 83). Therefore education is remade through the practice of applying
this problem posing process with the students with the explicit goal of helping students
to recognize the world as dynamic instead of static, so students may have
transformative experiences. Educational praxis cannot serve an oppressive society
because oppressive groups could never allow students to use the word why (Freire,
1970). Wink (1997) agreed stating, “Problem posing causes people to ask questions
many do not want to hear” (p. 48). Moreover “it considers the social and cultural context
of education” (Shor, 1992, p. 31). So the goal of the problem posing teacher is “to
diversify subject matter and to use students’ thought and speech as the base for
22
developing critical understanding of personal experience, unequal conditions in society
and existing knowledge” (pp. 32-33).
In addition, problem posing encourages the asking of questions that leads to the
revelation of the hidden curriculum. The hidden curriculum is rarely grounded in a
traditional syllabus or established curriculum because it requires the interactive
relationship between the students and their environment (Wink, 1997). An important
tenet of progressive education is the use of purpose to guide instruction. To gain a
purpose, Dewey (1915) suggested: (a) observe the surroundings; (b) have an
understanding/knowledge of recent history, and (b) use judgment to put together the
pieces of what was observed and understand what it signifies.
To clarify the goals and objectives of problem posing for teachers, Freeman and
Freeman (1992) developed a codification model with six phases to clarify problem
posing for teachers:
- Code the whole story, picture, or film.
- The code is based on the learners’ lives.
- Learners identify and solve real-life problems.
- The goal is literacy for the learners.
- The goal is for teachers and students to empower themselves.
From this model, Wink (1997), an associate professor of education at California State
University and a former Spanish and reading teacher, developed a four phase model for
problem posing that reflects her position that “problem posing always ends in action” (p.
109). In her book, Critical Pedagogy: Notes from the Real World, Wink sought to
“provide access to the theory and practice of critical pedagogy” (p. xvi). She encouraged
teachers to engage their students in problem posing to “[bring] interactive participation
23
and critical inquiry into the established, prescribed curriculum” (p. 48).These four
phases, grounded in Freire’s (1970) problem posing and Freeman and Freeman’s
(1992) codification model, are presented here and are elaborated in chapter 3.
Figure 1. The problem posing process.
(Wink, 1997, pp. 108 - 109)
Wink’s model is closely linked with Freire’s (1970) problem posing. In Pedagogy of the
Oppressed, Freire described problem posing as a three step process. First the learners
would name the problem, and then would reflect critically before acting on the problem.
Freire’s process is diagramed here in a parallel structure with Wink’s for comparative
purposes.
Figure 2. Freire’s problem posing.
(Wink, 1997, p. 129)
Freire supported problem posing by calling on education to include the
opportunity for action. Following these phases, students observe and analyze their
world, and through their actions they become educated (Ardizzone, 2007). Students
recognize problems related to themselves “in the world and with the world” (Freire,
24
1970, p. 81), and they naturally want to address the problems in their context with the
authentic complexity and chaos found in real problems instead of isolated simplicity.
Because of these complexities, one problem leads to the next and students find
themselves committed to working through the problems.
Wink (1997) also developed models of transformative pedagogy, critical literacy,
and critical pedagogy. Figure 3 shows Wink’s model of transformative pedagogy. This
model closely resembles her problem posing process.
Figure 3. Transformative pedagogy.
(pp. 122-123)
In problem posing, the model chosen for this study, actions take place after the
problems are named. Students then work toward solutions by moving outside the
classroom into the world. Wink (1997) suggested that these actions may take the form
of a “letter to the editor, governor, legislators, or presidents; cleaning up a community;
25
beginning an environmental, social, cultural, or political action group” (p. 109). So
problem posing is recursive because it starts with inquiry and ends with actions that
often lead to new questions and new actions, and through language the students
generate new knowledge.
Praxis in Critical Literacy
To bring praxis into the classroom, students act on their environment, reflect on
it, and plan for transformation (Mayo, 1955). So, praxis exists between theory and
practice and is the heart of Freire’s conception of critical literacy (Mayo, 1955). In this
sense, the practice of critical literacy occurs in a classroom where students become
critically thinking citizens by questioning knowledge, experience, and the impact of
power relationships in society. Here the use of language is examined and analyzed
beyond usage and mechanics. Instead of the unnatural use of language in repetitive
lessons, students are led to struggle, to understand, and to learn the language of their
birth (Freeman & Freeman, 1992). The language of praxis supports the “real desire to
communicate vital impressions and conviction” (Shor, 1997, ¶ 25) by “[looking] again
and [seeing] in new ways” (Wink, 1997, p. xv).
According to Shor (1997), using critical literacy in a classroom includes risks.
Because the student occupies the center of the educational experience the results are
unpredictable. A critical teacher expects breakthroughs or resistance because “All
participants in a critical process become redeveloped as democratic agents and social
critics” (Shor, 1997, ¶ 30) as they engage in a reflective and reflexive process. The
social practice of language use in education is examined and then the insights are used
26
to study critically all social practices. This helps the student connect educational
experiences and observations to those in society and vice versa.
In addition to preparing for these risks, the teachers need to plan to provide time
for students to think (Krashen, 2001; Wink, 1997), and unfortunately, from the
perspective of those who value accountability above other educational goals, the results
of thinking are not always clear and measurable. It even appears that nothing is being
done (Wink, 1997). Thinking is encouraged through critical reflection and is observed in
the actions taken by the students. This leads to conscientization (Freire, 1970).
Conscientization is “a power we have when we recognize we know what we know”
(Wink, 1997, p. 26). As conscientization develops in students with time to think,
students and communities gain a voice to question themselves and society (Freire,
1970; Wink, 1997). For a critical teacher, theory and practice have a reciprocal
relationship, so theory reflects the practice in the classroom, and the classroom practice
informs theory building (Wink, 1997).
The act of reflection is an essential phase in transformative pedagogy. Reflection
serves two major purposes. It gives the students time to think and it creates patterns
and connections for students between what they are learning and the world beyond the
classroom (Wink, 1997). Reflections are accomplished either independently or with a
group. When students reflect, they learn on a transitional level “[reflecting] on reality
and on our received values, words, and interpretations in ways that illuminate meanings
we hadn’t perceived before. This reflection can transform our thought and behavior,
which in turn have the power to alter reality itself” (Shor, 1992, p. 22). Reflection allows
students to be aware of their participation, not as a “consumption of ideas but rather a
27
product of action” (Freire, 1970; Hasbrook, 2002). It is important to give students an
opportunity to reflect on the meaning of their learning because “human beings are
capable of overcoming limits if they can openly examine them” (Shor, 1992, p. 23).
Moreover, according to Hasbrook (2002), the reflective process allows students the
opportunity to “equitably [re-position] one’s relationship with others.” Hasbrook included
three possibilities for improving reflection in a problem posing praxis.
1. [Take] steps to connect students with the community.
2. [Follow] students’ initiative on issues of their concern.
3. [Harness] reflective writing toward a publication that resembles the product of action envisioned by Freire. (pp. 3-8)
The Third Idiom
In praxis, critical teaching may start with student generated themes. When this
teaching includes students connecting the familiar to the unfamiliar between the local
and the global, this discourse, called the third idiom by Shor, is “invented anew in each
classroom, situated in the students’ language and developmental levels, in the specific
subject matter, and the political climate of the school” (1992, p. 256). As shown in
Figure 4, the progression of the third idiom moves from the student generated theme, to
unfamiliar reflection, and then to unfamiliar connection of the local to the global. Starting
narrow it broadens as the students moved through the process.
28
Figure 4. The third idiom.
Through this process, students come to speak in their own voices about their own
concrete experiences, and the teacher uses colloquial language instead of academic
language to help students overcome their reluctance to participate in genuine dialogue.
This transforms both the discourses of the teacher and the student to a new type of
discourse, the third idiom, and in the dialogue the students are able to move from the
concrete to the critical. The teacher and student transactions in the classroom are
equal, giving the same value to each. Social and intellectual empowerment evolves,
replacing teacher talk and student silence (Shor, 1992). Shor summarized, “In the third
idiom, traditional knowledge becomes what it has always been, a historical product
reflecting inequality and needing critical perspectives and multicultural reconstruction”
(p.257).
The next section of Chapter 2 includes the literature support from critical literacy
theory. This section begins with a general review of critical literacy followed by a
historical section that recognizes the contributions of critical literacy theorists. This
29
section ends with the reason for critical literacy in the classroom with a description of
classroom and teacher practices that support the theory.
Critical Literacy Theory
Literacy itself comes in many forms: functional, academic, constructive,
emergent, cultural, and critical. Functional literacy includes the common language
needed to participate in daily life. Academic literacy is language used in schools and
universities. When literacy is described as emergent, it is often preschool and early
childhood teachers talking about the literacies of students before they learn to decode
words and read. Cultural literacy is the language that is from the perspective of the
dominant culture (Shor, 1997). Lastly, critical literacy as described earlier helps to
develop a complex understanding of the word and the world (Freire, 1970). It is through
literacies that we understand our world, and through critical literacy, students and
teachers interact with the world through experience and observation naming and
reflecting what they know and what they see. This enables students to understand the
construction of power. So, literacy in a traditional sense is reading the word, decoding,
whereas critical literacy invites the reader to read the world and learn to understand the
messages found in social, cultural, political and historical contexts (Wink, 1997).
Critical literacy is a distinct theoretical and pedagogical field focused on
“identifying authentic social problems and ways of addressing these problems through
language and action” (Knobel, 2007, p. vii). The goal of critical literacy is to “use and
teach oppositional discourses so as to remake ourselves and our culture” (Shor, 1997,¶
3). In this sense critical literacy is both reflective and reflexive: reflective when the
30
student questions knowledge and reflexive in the reaction of challenging and acting
against inequality (Shor, 1997).
According to Shor (1997), critical literacy is the dream of a new society “against the
power now in power” (pp. 128-129). Feminist scholar, Rich, defined critical literacy as
“language used against fitting unexceptionably into the status quo” (1979, p. 14).
Anderson and Irvine (1993) determined that critical literacy is “learning to read and write
as part of the process of becoming conscious of one’s experience as historically
constructed within specific power relations,” (p. 82) while Aronowitz and Giroux (1985)
said “critical literacy would make clear the connections between knowledge and power
(p. 132). Kfrertovics (1985) explained that “Critical literacy… points to providing
participants not merely with functional skills, but with the conceptual tools necessary to
critique and engage society along with its inequalities and injustices… made practical”
(p. 51), and Knobel (2007) described critical literacy as “concerned with critiquing
relationships among language use, social practice, and power” (p. vii). However the
best definition for connecting this field to problem posing praxis is probably the one
provided by Ohmann (1996), who called critical literacy “literacy from below,” (p. 54)
where participants actively question the status quo and imagine solutions because this
is what the students are asked to accomplish when they begin with their own
experiences and work together to end with an action phase in problem posing (Wink,
1997).
Critical literacy as a term is recent. Shor and Kretovics used it in the 1980s, but it
wasn’t printed in a book until the 1993 publication of Lankshear and MacLaren’s Critical
Literacy: Politics, Praxis and the Postmodern (Knobel, 2007). Though not the theme of
31
this dissertation, it is also important to recognize that an important theme in critical
literacy includes attention to language learners in a pluralistic society and the
importance of providing students the opportunity to learn in their own language (Wink,
1997).
Important People in Critical Literacy
Both Dewey and Freire believed that progressive education was a more humane
educational experience than traditional educational experiences, and individual purpose
and direction served as one of the most important tenets of progressive education
(Ardizzone, 2007; Dewey, 1902; Freire, 1970). Additional voices that influenced the
development of this theory include Vygotsky who emphasized the “fundamental
importance of context and culture on language and learning” (Vygotsky, 1962; Wink,
1997, p. 81). Vygotsky’s connection to critical literacy includes the significance of
context, the zone of proximal development in context, and the connection between
thoughts and the use of language in context (Vygotsky, 1962; Wink, 1997).
Critical literacy is also influenced by Krashen who developed the Idea Generator
based on cognitive psychology. This five stage model describes thinking and the
generation of new ideas.
1. Gather information
2. Prepare ideas
3. Incubate
4. Illuminate
5. Verify (Krashen as cited in Wink, 1997, p. 99).
This can be compare to Freire’s guideline for learning critically.
32
1. Name
2. Reflect critically
3. Act
Krashen’s five steps are present in the first two steps of Freire’s guideline for learning
critically. However, Freire continued to include action as a final step. Freire’s and
Dewey’s contributions to critical literacy were significant. The next two sections will
consider each of these theorists and their individual connections to critical literacy
theory and the instructional use of problem posing.
Dewey and the Progressive Movement
“There is all the difference in the world between having something to say and
having to say something” (Dewey, 1915, p. 35). Critical literacy was grounded in the
work of John Dewey and the Progressive Movement, and theorists were heavily
influenced by Dewey’s belief that educational experiences should be purposeful, not
contrived.
There is, I think, no point in the philosophy of progressive education which is sounder than its emphasis upon the importance of the participation of the learner in the formation of the purposes which direct his activities in the learning process, just as there is no defect in traditional education greater than its failure to secure the active cooperation of the pupil in construction of purposes involved in his studying. (1938, p. 67).
Dewey (1938) described traditional schooling as transmitting knowledge and skills that
are previously developed by experts of the past but not connected to the current lives of
the students. Instead, Dewey proposed a scientific curriculum where students’ research
and experiment with what was close at hand and readily available instead of beginning
with the abstract, distant, and academic materials framed in teacher discourse.
33
According to Dewey (1915), thinking and reflection do not occur without a
purpose. “A person who has gained the power of reflective attention, the power to hold
problems, questions, before the mind is in so far, intellectually speaking, educated” (p.
93). When thinking occurs, it happens to meet a difficulty, to solve a problem, or to plan
a project. Following a problem solving method, as described previously, leads to a more
logical and clearly thought-out solution than speculating with abstract or random
thoughts.
Dewey described the disconnected, unauthentic instructional practice as “forever
tasting and never eating; always having his palate tickled upon the emotional side, but
never getting the organic satisfaction that comes only with digestion of food and
transformation of it into working power” (1902, p. 112). The better alternative is to
develop the lessons built on past experiences that can be turned into interests instead
of moving from one concept to the next. Through self-generated questions, students
judge, reason, deliberate and are actively engaged in the materials that will lead to
answers. Students should voluntarily self-direct questions and problems (Dewey, 1915).
Freire and Critical Literacy
Like Dewey, Freire (1970) found that a purposeful education would move beyond
the transfer of knowledge. Freire said “Liberating education consists in acts of cognition,
not transferrals of information” (p. 79). What Dewey described as traditional education,
Freire called banking. Banking has the educational goal of deposit making (Roberts,
2000; Wink, 1997). Extending this metaphor, Wink and others have written about
cultural capital, and described it as “the behaviors, values, and practices that are valued
34
by the dominant society” (p. 33-34), and though these are real practices, they are often
unspoken and unconscious concepts and actions that promote the success of the
dominant members of a society. The central bank is exclusionary instead of
inclusionary, and the knowledge held in the bank is not neutral; it works to “promote and
protect its position” of power (Shor, 1992, p. 34). Mayo (1955) cautioned teachers to be
aware that students have participated in banking for years, and they may initially
perceive the teacher’s approach as incompetence and become resistant. He
recommended community and group assignments initially with the teacher posing
questions, problems and issues to students. When educational approaches stress the
activities of the student and teacher together, instead of the teacher-leader role, the
teacher learns to work at the side of the students. The teacher and students in the class
work together to answer the questions that have been posed (Freeman & Freeman,
1992).
Shor (2000) described Freire’s critical literacy as pedagogy that invites students
to think critically by having them question the status quo when they are working with any
content. Education is an inquiry into the social and personal consequences and
contexts of that content where “Critical thought… is oppositional knowledge-making
focused on self in society and oriented toward alternatives for change” (p. 1). Through
dialogue students confront uncomfortable topics and relearn. This “can move people to
wonderful new levels of knowledge; it can transform relations; it can change things”
(Wink, 1997, p. 36).
35
In Freire’s later works, hope became a central theme. He believed until his death
that critical analysis of the world and politics would lead to positive social change
(Bartlett, 2005).
The Reason for Critical Literacy
As explained in the preceding sections on Dewey and Freire, critical literacy
provides a purpose for learning, and it provides equitable social interactions between
the students and the teachers. According to Shor (1997), when education serves to
maintain the status quo, it promotes tradition, hierarchy, patriarchy and elitism.
Examples from the literature include the acceptance of the resegregation of the United
States school system (Shor, 1997), and the use of torture disregarding the Geneva
Convention (Pipher, 2006). As conceived by critical literacy, reflective and cooperative
learning experiences offer students and teachers opportunities to extend their learning
from the classroom to the world. According to Goldstein (2007), by engaging students
and showing students how to transcend worksheets and textbooks, critical literacy
enables students to think more democratically with the specific goal of action . To
initiate this process, according to Wink (1997), a critical teacher must look at power and
social forces that affect schools.
When it is part of the curriculum, critical literacy is seen as offering solutions for
major problems in schools. From this perspective, in schools, as in society, those who
are doing without are silenced by those with more; Eastern European American culture
dominates non-European cultures; girls are not only silenced by boys, but often by the
wealthy, European Americans and the boys who do not even know they are doing this.
36
Many of those who are silenced do not know they are silent (Wink, 1997). As the
oppressed, students are taught to be passive instead of creative; they become
conditioned to remain compliant and silent, the object instead of the subject; they wait to
be told what to do (Mayo, 1955; Shor, 1992). From a more traditional perspective,
Goodlad, in A Place Called School, Goodlad concluded that:
1. Most of the schools… were oriented to some generally accepted concept of what school is and not to an ongoing inquiry into either group or individual learning needs of specific children in particular communities.
2. [It] would appear that neither pre-service nor in-service teacher education programs have provided [teachers] with the precise pedagogical understandings and skills required for diagnosing and remedying the learning programs and needs of individual pupils.
3. [Teachers] are very much alone in their work. It is not just a matter of being alone, all alone with children in a classroom cell, although this is a significant part of their aloneness. Rather, it is the feeling – in a larger measure the actuality – of not being supported by someone who knows about their work, is sympathetic to it, wants to help and, indeed, does help. (1984, p. 366)
Freire and Macedo (1987) stated that teaching readers while excluding the social and
political dimensions of the interaction, leads to cultural reproduction where the reader is
an object. They would address the issues raised by Goodlad through the critical literacy
problem posing process for both the students and the teachers. When citizens, in this
case, teachers and students, are encouraged to build and share power relationships,
opportunities for emancipation emerge. However, democracy in education has been
recently narrowed into a political agenda of specific social interests (Giroux, 1993). As
Shor (1992) explained,
In sum, the subject matter, the learning process, the classroom discourse, the cafeteria menu, the governance structure, and the environment of the school teach students what kind of people to be and what kind of society to build as they learn math, history, biology, literature, nursing, or accounting. (p. 15)
37
Giroux (1993) identified three important approaches to critical literacy as a
vehicle of social reform: (a) Teachers’ tasks should be redefined as cultural workers to
increase the possibility of democracy; (b) Popular culture must be framed in the struggle
without romanticizing it; and (c) “Pedagogy must be viewed as the deliberate attempt to
produce knowledge, forms of ethical address, and social identities” (p. 39). These
approaches could be accomplished with Freire and Macedo’s literacy programs.
The new literacy programs must be largely based on the notion of emancipator literacy, in which literacy is viewed as one of the major vehicles by which oppressed people are able to participate in the socio-historical transformation of their society. In this view, literacy programs should be tied not only to mechanical learning of reading skills but, additionally, to a critical understanding of the overall goals for national reconstruction. Thus, the reader’s development of a critical comprehension of the text, and the socio-historical content to which it refers, becomes an important factor of our notion of literacy….The reading of a text now demands a reading within the social connect to which it refers. (1987, p. 157)
Critical literacy challenges the status quo to connect “the political and the
personal, the public and the private, the global and the local, the economic and the
pedagogical, for rethinking our lives and for promoting justice in place of inequality”
(Shor, 1997, p. 1). As an English content- area researcher, author, and instructor,
Moffett (1983) encouraged teachers to provide just such a wide range of situations for
students to write beyond the audience of a single teacher and simple purpose. As Mayo
(1955) pointed out, there is a “sense of political militarism… fighting a good and just
fight with a clear purpose” (p. 40) found in the writings of students who participate in
critical literacy.
It was Freire’s wish that Western educators work with his theory of liberation
within the struggles in their own countries and with the understanding that there is a
clear connection between conditions within a specific environment and the wider
society. This can be extended to the school as a representation of society. His intention
38
was that even though the students would be involved in change, the movement would
be framed in hope, struggle and a pedagogy of transformation (Roberts, 2000).
The Teacher in Critical Literacy
Wink summarized, “We do not do critical pedagogy; we live it” (1997, p. 103).
The mindset of the critical literacy teacher invites students to participate and question
power and relationships with the goal of developing action. Instead of a class of
“teacher-talk,” the classroom experience is guided by student “needs, conditions,
speech habits, and perceptions” (Shor, 1997, ¶ 30) from which the teacher plans
lessons and creates activities that encourage student inquiry (Wink, 1997). Though
teachers bring knowledge and expertise to the classroom, the teacher maintains the
role of a resource for the students, intentionally holding back information to prevent one-
way discussions and an inflexible syllabus. The teacher encourages a collaborative,
safe environment where the teacher and the students learn and teach each other
without risk and where students take ownership of their own learning (Shor, 1997; Wink,
1997).
Freire’s conception of a critical teacher was one who “[engaged] in dialogue with
the students, also being taught by them while the students [were] also teaching while
being taught”(1970, p. 80). The teacher learns and relearns through the engagement
with students in a generative instructional model (Mayo, 1955). According to Wink, there
are three models of instruction that include: the transmission model, the generative
model, and the transformative model. In the transmission model, the teacher lectures
and the students take notes to be tested. The generative model allows students to
39
engage actively in their learning through activity and inquiry, and the transformative
model generates knowledge like the generative, but it transforms to the world beyond
the classroom. In this model, also referred to as critical pedagogy, students come to
expect that their actions may make a difference in the world (Wink, 1997).
According to Shor (1997), the technical skills required to teach critically are not
difficult, but it is challenging to create this new attitude toward teaching in the current
school atmosphere of teacher accountability and mass standardized testing. Even in
schools where students pass the tests, teachers understand their worth is tied to
student performance, so they choose to rely on lecture and recitation to cover more
material efficiently (Costigan, Crocco, & Zumwalt, 2004). However, the teacher may rest
assured that the critical literacy approach maintains rigor through the critical analysis of
texts, language, and society through a balance of classroom power by providing all
students an opportunity to make their voice heard instead of the narrow and trivial
curriculum designed to cover the material of standardized tests (McNeil, 2000).
However, contrary to traditional expectations, a teacher cannot expect to remain neutral
in class discussions. Realistically, the act of education is never neutral (Bruner, 2006).
As previously described, the critical literacy teacher considers how the subject
connects to the students’ experiences and negotiates the curriculum with the students
based on their language, themes, and understandings, so that students are oriented
toward democracy through student culture, course transparency, and student input
(Mayo, 1955; Shor, 1992). To orient instruction, Dewey (1902) suggested these
questions:
• What is there in the child’s experience that is usable?
• How can these elements of experience be used?
40
• How does the teacher’s understanding of the content assist the students in their learning?
• What medium would provide growth if properly directed? (p. 117)
Critical Literacy in the Classroom
According to Wink (1997), the better the teacher uses critical literacy in the
classroom, the quicker students will stop listening because they become engaged
independently in their work. As Shor (1997) explains, it is important for students to
maintain critical involvement in the class to improve learning and discipline in the
classroom. He explains that when “students are trained to be authority-dependent,
waiting to be told what things mean and what to do, a position that encourages passive-
aggressive submission and sabotage” prevails (¶ 34). This student attitude is not
present in classes where the students are critically engaged.
According to Moffett (1983), student motivation is improved when students are
communicating with real audiences. Today’s schools turn out Advanced Placement
students who can identify and write about all of the literary and syntactical devices used
by authors, but without their own purposes, their writing may not transcend theme or
plot summaries. In addition, English teachers often feel compelled to have students
write about English, so that students are composing essays on literary styles, themes,
and authors. Instead, Moffett suggested writing to real purposes and real audiences. He
identified four ways to reach an audience beginning with the self and moving out to the
public.
41
Figure 5. Audience types.
(1983)
There are real audiences for writing and real reasons to write. Comfortable with multiple
points of view, contradictions, unresolved questions, and nuance, change writers can
deal with complexity and participate in democracy (Pipher, 2006). For the purpose of a
research assignment, Wink’s four phases of problem posing represent the most
comparable structure in a high school classroom to the problem-solution structure
necessary for a meaningful research assignment. The four phases end in action, and a
complete action requires an appropriate audience to receive this action.
According to Ardizzone (2007), schools focused on discipline create a culture of
silence that removes student voice and authentic experiences. Sometimes youths are
42
scapegoats turned into stereotypes instead of valued potential contributors to the
political arena and their own educations. However, few opportunities are provided for
students to participate in this type of reflection. In schools where discipline is the focus,
students must recognize that student silence is not permanent, but a temporary limit, so
that the pedagogy can be libratory and transformational. School improvement must be
accompanied by a change in attitude toward students.
…young people are agents of change… they have a voice and they want the world to hear it. Education can and should serve as a means to foster this transformation. Teachers can be part of this transformation if they are willing to engage in the critical pedagogy necessary. (Ardizzone, 2007, pp. 59-60)
Acknowledgment of Bias
Pedagogy, education, and curricula are political (Mayo, 1955; Shor, 1992).
Critical teachers must analyze their intentions in relation to the society where a
privileged, white, young, well-educated, well-employed, straight, and suburban home
owner is participating in, and indeed benefiting from, the status quo that teachers are
encouraging students to be critical toward. Many teachers understand that they bring
bias into the classroom when they work with students, but through this
acknowledgement, teachers must become committed to equity and social justice
(Goldstein, 2007). The goal for the teacher must be to “[listen] and [hear] all sides,
carefully considering and equally critically evaluating those sides no matter what their
seemingly positive or negative effects are or will be” (Pascarella, 2007, p. 39). This goal
is well explained by Moffett (1983):
If we construed public education as personal liberation, it would hardly mean more than fulfilling the already professed goal of teaching the young to think for themselves. But truly free inquiry had conflicted so much with the old goal of
43
cultural transmission and identity maintenance that we have sabotaged our own noble aim. This is unnecessary and unwise. If we educate youngsters to transcend their heritage, they will be able to transform it and lead other cultures to do the same. (p. 32)
As Bier (2007) reminded teachers, no matter what school or what group of
students taught, there is always a heterogeneous group. It is not always what they look
like and where they are from; it is sometimes about the way that they learn, so it is
imperative that all teachers are prepared to meet students as individuals. How the
teacher maintains a hopeful, transformative attitude is part of this approach.
Transformative Optimism
In his book Engaging Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of Possibility: From Blind to
Transformative Optimism, Rossatto (2005) employed Freire’s Pedagogy of Possibility to
analyze student optimism. Hope is required to nurture dreams, and hope is developed
through a belief system. However, these belief systems are shaped by the limits of the
environment and society. In his research, Rossatto worked in both Brazil and the United
States with high and low achieving ninth grade students describing their ability to see
transformative possibilities using four distinct forms of optimism: blind, fatalistic,
resilient, and transformative.
Blind optimism indicates a condition of oblivion that prevents consciousness or self-determination.
Fatalistic optimism shows beliefs and attitudes in which events are fixed in time, promoting feelings of powerlessness to change these events.
Resilient optimism reveals conformation to normative order as a means to achieve an individualist future goal.
Transformative optimism sees the formation of a collective resistance against social processes that produce alienating realities, with the hope of achieving a liberating future. (pp. 23-24)
44
The individuals’ construct of optimism can be mapped using Freire’s descriptions.
Figure 6. Levels of optimism.
(Rossatto, 2005, p. 47)
Framed in Freirean pedagogy, the goal is for students to determine their own actions by
developing and transforming the world where they live. Because “hopelessness tends to
immobilize people, leading them into fatalism, and thus blocking their acquisition of the
indispensable strengths required to recreate their worlds” they can only train instead of
participate in education (Rossatto, 2005, p. 24).
Jackson (2007) defined Rossatto’s work as a well-developed thesis that sought
ways to use Freire’s perspective in a case study of students’ experiences of school.
Though she recognized that personal transformation is possible, she was critical of the
45
idea that transformation of the self will lead to a transformed world. For example,
educators may choose to construct an educational experience that is developed from
daily life, but the ruling groups still control the how and the what is taught, so they still
promote hegemonic control.
Rossatto’s study used Freire’s model of optimism to provide a clear framework
for identifying optimism and the potential for recognizing transformation in learners, and
Wink’s model of problem posing supports both the students’ personal transformation
and the possibility for a social transformation (Freire, 1970; Rossatto, 2005; Wink,
1997).
Summary
Following the German model of researchers in specific fields completing writing
reports, the American tradition of the research paper began shortly after the Civil War
and continues to be practiced in the same form today in English classes across the
country. Ballenger (1992) and Shook (1988) argue that the paper should be purposeful,
so students can connect their topics to their lives beyond school as a form of
informational literacy. Both Shor (1992) and Elbow (2000) are concerned about the
focus on the grade over the process in report writing. This misguided effort has the
effect of minimizing student voice and editing skills above the critical thinking skills
needed to complete research. To improve the assignment, the purpose of research for
social action was supported in the literature (H. Giroux, 1997; Lawrence, 1999;
Mancina, 2005; McKenna & McKenna, 2000; Shafer, 1999; Shor, 1992; Slack, 2001;
Williams, 1993).
46
Wink’s (1997) problem posing praxis, based on Freire (1970), connects the
theory of critical literacy to the student research paper. Starting with their own
experiences, students develop as they critically analyze their environment (Freire, 1970;
Shor, 1997). Freire’s purpose in problem posing is to solve a social problem, in contrast
to Dewey, whose educational process uses a purpose to guide instruction. Wink
achieves a purposeful education by requiring that “problem posing always ends in
action” (1997, p. 109). This complements the praxis of critical literacy that supports the
students looking at their environment with a critical eye, so they can “read the world”
(Freire, 1970; Shor, 1997; Wink, 1997). When this occurs in a equitable classroom, it
creates the third idiom where student and teacher interact in colloquial language, and
intellectual empowerment grows (Shor, 1992). This classroom setting is a goal in this
study.
Ohmann calls critical literacy “literacy from below,” where participants actively
question the status quo and imagine solutions (1996). Based on this literature, the
problem posing process as described by Wink (1997) will be utilized in the research
process in a tenth grade class setting to determine if the English class research
experience is facilitated by a critical problem posing process as evidenced by the work
and interviews of my students in this secondary research project. The work of the
students will be analyzed to determine the supports and constraints of this process that
begins with the student experiences and ends with an action phase (Wink, 1997).
Based on the literature, the students working in this process will learn to think more
democratically with the specific goal or action (Goldstein, 2007) and be involved in
47
change and learn in an environment with hope, struggle and a pedagogy of
transformation (Freire, 1970; Roberts, 2000).
To conclude, Wink’s process, grounded in Freire’s approach, and consistent with
Dewey and others who advocate inquiry, action, and relevance is the framework for the
research process described in this study. This description will fill a void in the literature
that connects the relevance and engagement of students participating in Wink’s
problem posing process to the high school research paper. This study contributes to the
body of knowledge about inquiry, critical pedagogy and high school English instruction.
48
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to develop a case to confirm, refine, or elaborate
the supports and constraints as the participants in this single case study worked through
Wink’s (1997) problem posing process embedded into the participants’ research
assignment. The problem posing process described by Freire encourages students to
“come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in progress, in
transformation” (1970, p. 83). This process allows students to have transformative
experiences resulting from recognition of the world as dynamic (Shor, 1992). For this
study an instructional plan was developed that used Wink’s four phases of problem
posing with the explicit goal of allowing students to recognize and work on problems “in
the world and with the world” (Freire, 1970, p. 81).
To bring a praxis of critical literacy into the classroom of this study, I invited the
participants to act on their environment, to reflect on it, and to plan for transformation
(Mayo, 1955), engaging in praxis in the classroom. Critical instruction started with the
student generated themes. As the teacher, I brought knowledge and expertise to the
classroom, and I worked to maintain the role of a resource for the students intentionally
preventing one-way discussions and encouraging a collaborative, safe environment
where the students and I learned and taught each other without risk, and where
students took ownership of their own learning (Dewey, 1938; Freeman & Freeman,
1992; Roberts, 2000; Shor, 1992, 1997; Wink, 1997). I began by listening to the
students to determine their concerns, then followed this with a research plan, so the
participants could look objectively at their own experiences and concerns about their
49
topic (Freeman & Freeman, 1992; Roberts, 2000; Shor, 1992). Dewey (1915), Freire
(1970) and Wink (1997) have all devised a variety of plans for a problem posing
process. This study followed the phases of Wink’s (1997) problem posing process as
represented in Figure 1.
The research question for this study was What were the supports and constraints
to problem posing as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating
in this secondary research project? To answer this question, data were generated and
analyzed using the following guiding questions:
1. What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project? 2. What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project? 3. What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
This chapter is divided into two sections. The first section provides the
information relevant to the study’s methodology. The second section shares the
instructional plan used to provide a sequential framework for understanding the setting
where the data were collected.
Case Study Methodology
According to Yin (1994), studying contemporary events in a classroom provides
many challenges including: the struggle to manipulate behaviors, the variety of student
work, and the teacher as a participant-observer. Because of the real-life context of the
50
classroom and the complex social phenomena being considered, this research lends
itself well to a case study. Yin defines a case study as
1. …an empirical inquiry that - investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context,
especially when - the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident
2. …inquiry - copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be many
more variables of interest than data points, and as one result - relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge in a
triangulating fashion, and as another result - benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data
collection and analysis. (p. 13)
Therefore a case study is a comprehensive research strategy that incorporates data
collection and data analysis that moves beyond a systematic design for conducting
research. For this study a single case study design was chosen to “determine whether a
theory’s propositions [were] correct” (Yin, 1994, p. 13). It should be noted however that
case studies offer additional challenges beyond other studies because the steps are not
routinized, so care was taken to have a clear protocol in place for the analysis of these
data (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006; Yin, 1994).
According to Yin (1994), case study methodology works well when the data are
collected from a real-life context when the events being studied and the setting are
intertwined. The next section will describe the setting and the participants from this
study.
Population and Sample
This study is about a single implementation of problem posing in a classroom but
also includes a deeper analysis of ten participants. This design provides an embedded
51
structure, or multiple units of analysis, in this single case study of the implementation.
(Hancock & Algozzine, 2006; Yin, 1994).
The Setting
The statistics that describe the community and school’s setting have been
approximated to provide confidentiality to the school district and the study participants.
These observations took place at a high school in a North Texas community known
locally for its wealth and high academic expectations. With a median annual household
income of more than $100,000, a median home value of more than $250,000, and
almost 70% of citizens with a baccalaureate degree or higher, this community was
economically stable and generally valued education ("Community Profile City of [Name],
Texas: Demographics," 2006). The statistical profile of the school demonstrated the
high academic achievements and expectations of the district and community. The
median grade point average for the 2007 graduating class (n=<700) was around 3.3.
Results of SAT testing showed these students scored 50 to 70 points higher than the
national average in reading, mathematics, and writing. Last year, more than 700
students took at least one Advanced Placement test (The school offered 25 AP
courses), and more than 90% of the graduates attended college after graduation.
However, even with these positive indicators of academic success, this high school’s
ranking from the state of Texas was Academically Acceptable because of low
performance in one subpopulation. Ethnically, the student body was approximately 70%
white, 10% Hispanic, 5% African-American, and 15% Asian ("[School Name]
Demographics," 2007).
52
Permission to conduct this study was provided by the University of North Texas
Internal Review Board, the principal of the school; all of the participants, the parents of
the under-age participants, the dean of students, and my student teacher signed
consent forms to take part in this study. Not every student in the class signed the
consent form, and the work of these nonparticipating students was not utilized in any
way in this study.
The Participants
The participants (n=10) for this study included eight males and two females in an
on-level English II course taught by me, the principal investigator. The participants
studied were white (n=6), African-American (n=1), Asian (n=2), and Hispanic (n=1). On-
level English for tenth grade was a general English course that follows the Texas
Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) as its curriculum. It was not an advanced or
honors course, nor was it a remedial course. Because of the high academic level of the
coursework at this school, these on-level courses are sometimes chosen by students
who might otherwise qualify for an advanced or honor course but either do not want or
have time to do homework. In addition, some students lack the skills to keep up with the
speed of the advanced course, so they enroll in an on-level course such as the one in
this study. Though special education students were often present because of the
inclusion philosophy of the district, this was not true for this group of participants. None
of these participants were identified with an individual education program (IEP) or a 504
plan. Only one participant was being monitored, according to state guidelines, as an
English language learner.
53
Participant Demographic Characteristics
Both the Informed Consent form (Appendix B), signed by the parents of the
participants, and the Student Assent Form (Appendix C), signed by the participants,
assured the students and their parents that “reports from this study [would] replace
student names with pseudonyms to protect confidentiality.” These forms were collected
two months before data collection began. Table 1 presents the participant pseudonyms,
gender and ethnicity.
Table 1
Participant Demographic Characteristics
Participant
Pseudonym
Gender
Race/Ethnicity
Bethany
Brett
James
Justin
Mark
Morgan
Nathan
Neal
Noah
Seth
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
White
White
White
White
Hispanic
African American
White
White
Asian/Iranian
Asian/Indian
Note: Race and ethnicity are as identified by the participants.
The Case Study Protocol
The steps for a case study are not “routinized” (Yin, 1994, p. 38), so care was
taken to assure that there was a study protocol. According to Yin, “case study protocol
54
is more than an instrument” (p. 63); moreover, a protocol with procedures and general
rules improves the quality of the study. In this section, I will provide the explanation for
the type of case study utilized, and I will reveal the protocol used.
To conduct this study of “events in their real-life contexts” in a single unit or
bound system, a case study instrument was utilized (Yin, 1994, p. 27 & 66). This was an
embedded case study because there were ten participants analyzed as subunits. Each
participant’s work was considered, but then all of the subunits were considered
holistically to provide final analysis and results of the study.
In place for this study was a case study protocol that included the procedures and
general rules for the study. A protocol was important to remind me of what I was
studying, and it helped me anticipate problems and plan ahead. This protocol is
explained here in four sections: an overview, field procedures, case study questions,
and a guide for the report.
Overview of the Protocol
According to Yin (1994), the overview assures that clear objectives are
determined and that relevant literature has been considered. In this study I set out to
see how students would participate in problem posing during a secondary research
assignment, given the perspectives and prior knowledge established in Chapter 2.
Following the study’s guiding questions, participant work was systematically analyzed
for evidence of the benefits and constraints to problem posing. To provide a problem
posing situation in this class, lessons were constructed around a traditional research
paper assignment. The participants completed the research assignment with a problem
55
posing focus, and all of their writing and artifacts were archived for analysis in a
research database.
Field Procedures of the Protocol
According to Yin (1994), the field procedures include permissions to visit
research sites and the collection of general sources and procedures for the study. As
previously described, the setting of this study was in my own classroom in a north
Texas high school. This provided maximum accessibility to the participants, but
difficulties arose in the documentation of observations. The nature of case study data is
different from data collected in a laboratory; a balance must be achieved between the
needs of the participants and the needs of the study (Yin, 1994). Because I was actively
teaching and participating with students in the role of the teacher, notes were written
after class instead of during class, and because I was often working with an individual
student, my perspective was often distracted from the group as a whole, focusing
instead on one sub unit of the case at a time. Although notes were taken about the
progress of the teaching, the primary data for this are the actual words of the
participants as they wrote in their journals, completed their assignments, and
participated in interviews. Care was taken to preserve all of the work completed through
this process. Work that could not be saved on paper such as interviews and
presentations was digitally recorded on an audio device and transcribed.
To be a participant observer in this process, I also had to be well-organized. To
assure that time would not become a constraint, materials for the unit including journals,
books, movie clips, and advertisements were acquired over the summer before I began
56
working with participants; plans were written and a power point developed to facilitate
the movement and the unity of the problem posing in an environment fraught with
distractions and unscheduled interruptions. In addition, special attention was given to
collecting the work of participants when it was completed, so it could be copied and
returned quickly so as not to interrupt their progress. Because of a new state law that
moved the start of school back to Labor Day, the curriculum schedule was fragmented,
and these early plans served me well by keeping the unit cohesive even though it was
interrupted during the state assessments.
Case Study Questions of the Protocol
According to Yin (1994), the research questions should be kept in mind to assure
that the data collected answers the questions. He recommends matching the data
collected to the questions in a table. Table 2 below was used to determine which
phases of problem posing would best be utilized to answer the three guiding questions
stated at the beginning of this chapter.
57
Table 2
Use of Sources to Answer Guiding Questions
Phase Question #1 / Supports
Question #2 / Constraints
Question #3 / Problem Posing
Peer Journals X X X Problem Board X X Research Summaries
X X
Interviews X X X Research Products X X X Journal Reflections X X X
Guide for the Report of the Protocol
According to Yin (1994), outlining and formatting for the analysis should be
deliberately organized. Using the protocol, the data were collected and analyzed with
the expectation that the report would be composed to answer the research questions
and the three guiding questions. The analysis in Chapter 4 is divided by the three
guiding questions, and the findings in Chapter 5 are explained in relation to the
questions. This structure was determined before the analysis of the data to provide a
clear analytic focus, which resulted in a clear report of analysis and findings.
Quality in the Research Design
Because the application of the theoretical basis of this study is complex, two
methods were used to try to ensure the integrity of the research process. One was
using Yin’s (1994; 2003) criteria for establishing quality in case study research and the
other was conducting a pilot study.
58
Establishing Quality
Four concepts for criterion were used to establish quality in the research design.
They included:
- construct validity
- internal validity
- external validity
- reliability
To assure construct validity, operational measures from Yin’s Case Study Research:
Design and Methods (1994) were utilized to provide the authority for the research
design. Yin provided two steps to assure construct validity:
1. Select the specific types of changes that are to be studied (in relation to the original objectives of the study) and
2. Demonstrate that the selected measures of these changes do indeed reflect the specific types of change that have been selected. (p. 34)
The specific types of changes were clearly described and assessed through the use of
the three research questions, and the analysis of the data derived from the questions
demonstrated the changes reflected in the participants.
For internal validity, a linear chain of sources, or data points, was constructed to
establish the relationship between Wink’s (1997) problem posing process in the
participants’ work and the final outcomes that were measured by the data revealed by
the third research question. The data sources were chosen to show the convergence of
the evidence through multiple sources that included writing, interviews and artifacts.
External validity is supported in the literature review that describes critical literacy
as the foundation of Wink’s (1997) theory and supports the guiding questions. A case
study is not generalizable to a population but should instead “[strive] to generalize a
59
particular set of results to some broader theory” (Yin, 1994, p. 36). Thus, I sought to
share the results of this study in support of Wink’s (1997) problem posing process as
situated in critical literacy theory.
Finally, reliability was assured with this clear description of the study operations
that may be replicated in later studies. It was my intent to provide very clear procedures
that could be easily followed in the protocol and analysis description.
Pilot Study
Yin (1994) described the pilot study as a “laboratory for investigators, allowing
them to observe different phenomena from many different angles or to try different
approaches on a trial basis.” He recommends using the pilot study “formatively” to help
develop the guiding questions and clarification of the research design. The pilot study
should be utilized with the literature review to develop a robust research protocol (Yin,
1994, pp. 74-75).
A pilot study was completed during the 2006-2007 school year at the same
school as the dissertation project, but with the tenth grade students from the graduating
class of 2009. In the pilot study, I was looking for participants who showed signs of
agency to help them to participate actively in democracy (Bandura, 2006). An
instructional plan was designed and utilized for the pilot study, and the student work
was analyzed and reported. These data informed the theoretical foundation and the
instructional plan utilized for this study.
From the pilot study, I learned that the concepts of agency and democracy were
too broad for a focused study. I turned for this second study to problem posing (Freire,
60
1970; Wink, 1997) because it provided specific phases of participation for participants to
have the type of transformative experiences they needed to become active citizens. To
improve the transition from a formal research assignment to problem posing research
assignment, models from books, movies and even a former participant (from the pilot
study) were utilized as student examples.
At the end of the pilot study, five recommendations were made for improving
participant agency.
1. Include live sources during the topic investigation.
2. Require live audience of final product instead of offering it as an extra-credit opportunity.
3. Encourage topics that are local.
4. Provide more peer review throughout the process. .
5. Return research summary for revision until the participant has a plan for action.
Data Collection Procedures
According to Yin, the study design should use the data to connect the research
questions logically to the conclusions. To make this a high-quality case study, these
principles were considered: (a) the use multiple sources of evidence that converged in
the findings; (b) the assurance that a case study database was developed for the
systematic maintenance of the data, and (c) a chain of events was utilized to enable
connections to be made, data to be collected efficiently, resulting in insightful
conclusions (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006; Yin, 1994).
Because of the sequential nature of Wink’s (1997) problem posing process, a
chain of events was constructed for the data collection following the phases of problem
posing. In Figure 8 below, the linear phases that represent the chain of events are
61
represented on the left with the sources of evidence to be gathered at each phase
represented on the right. As each phase was completed, the participant work was
collected and stored in the case study database for analysis.
Figure 7. Problem posing data collection.
As the participants worked through the problem posing unit, the writing and
artifacts they produced were collected as data. The collected data, primarily participant
work, were transcribed into data files when possible, but some of the data, artifacts in
particular, were kept in their original form for analysis.
62
During the transcription process, real names were replaced with pseudonyms
and unique identifying markers were either removed or replaced with generic markers.
Figure 8 presents the framework for the sequential phases of the data collection
process. There were eight phases of data collection in the study. The first bullet of each
phase represents the pedagogical activity, and the second bullet of each phase
describes the method of collection for each unit of datum.
63
Figure 8. Framework for data collection.
The final interviews (phase eight) were recorded and then transcribed. The
interview questions included:
1. Tell me about your research product.
64
2. Who was your audience?
3. What was your audiences’ response?
4. How did your work on this assignment change ____________ (insert topic)?
5. Are you going to continue to pursue this topic? How?
6. What is it like to [______________](have a certain experience)? (van Manen, 1982, p. 296)
These questions are explicitly open-ended in nature, so that the respondent’s
role is “one of an ‘informant’ rather than a respondent” (Yin, 1994, p. 84). Each
transcription was kept in a separate text file and entered into the database. These
interviews took place in an alcove off of the library. The students were called over one
at a time to answer these questions with me, and the interviews were about five minutes
each as described in the student consent form signed by the parents and the students.
Other pieces of data, though not primary sources, included my daily notes and my
teaching materials. As reference materials to this study, they were included in
Appendices B - H.
As previously discussed, my role in this study was as participant-observer
engaging in the events that I was studying. Because of this close role with the
participants, Yin (1994) suggests a clear description of my approaches for gathering
evidence. These included: observation of participants, reading of participants’ writing
samples, assessing participants’ projects, and the recording and transcription of
participant interviews. I have intentionally weighted the participant writing, interviews
and artifacts, choosing to rely on field notes only to fill in gaps and clear up confusion in
this study to help offset the teacher bias I may have felt for the participants
65
Each participant produced several written documents. These included copies of
notes from their sources, early drafts, research papers, research products and their
journals that were used as peer journals at the beginning of the process and then as a
place to reflect and member-check at the end of the problem posing process.
In this study, multiple source data triangulation was accomplished by collecting a
variety of data sources with the potential for corroborating a claim or fact. Figure 10
presents Yin’s convergence of multiple sources of evidence (single study).
Figure 9. Convergence of multiple sources of evidence.
(Adapted from Yin, 1994, pp. 92-93)
To assure that the sources were preserved accurately and available for analysis,
it was important to keep a case study database. This was first accomplished during the
data collection phase with an accordion file with a file for each participant, and a file for
teacher documentation. After the data were collected, some of the artifacts were
66
transferred to a digital format. This was necessary first to remove the non participants’
work from the collected data and to provide a clear copy for coding. At the end of the
development of the database, all of the items were available digitally through
transcripts, pictures, and text files, so that the evidence was available for review and
thus more reliable. The research papers, transcripts of the journals, and reflections were
kept in Word documents that were then coded using the comment features available in
the software.
Data Analysis Procedures
It is important to understand that “case studies, like experiments, are
generalizable to theoretical propositions and not to populations or universes” (Yin, 1994,
p. 10). The goal for this study is not to make statements about participants, but instead
the focus is on developing the theory of critical literacy through problem posing (1997).
To define the case and determine the unit of analysis, Wink’s (1997) problem
posing process served as a guide in this study. To clarify, for this study, the unit of
analysis included a group of ten students from my sixth period English class. The
findings from the data collection and analysis was compared to the literature related to
Wink’s (1997) theory. In addition, the literature provided key terms and definitions used
to organize and analyze the data. Although the use of multiple sources strengthens the
research design, it was still important that the analysis come together at the end to
focus on the overall theoretical purpose of the study (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006; Yin,
1994). In this case, the purpose was to develop a case to confirm, refine, or elaborate
67
on Wink’s (1997) framework for problem posing instruction, as applied in the specific
context of a high school research paper assignment.
In this case study “the questions and answers… [served] directly as the basis for
the final case study report” in an “attempt to integrate the available evidence and to
converge upon the facts of the matter or their tentative interpretation” (Yin, 1994, p. 97).
The answers to guiding questions rely upon the evidence in the sources with generous
citing. With this format, the goal is to achieve a “chain of evidence” (Yin, 1994, p. 98).
Not only does this clarify the direction of the study, it also allows the reader to trace the
logic of the study both forwards and backwards using the evidence to support the
findings linking them to the study’s questions (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006; Yin, 1994).
Coding
Before the coding began, the data were assembled into the research database,
so they could be accessed either by subunit, in this case a single student, or they could
be accessed in chronological order. Because of the great care to preserve the work of
the participants, many data points existed in the database. When these data points
were read, potential themes emerged. These potential themes were captured as codes
and entered into the coding dictionary. When the data were coded, the codes revealed
themes that ran through the data. In the analysis, the themes were revealed, and
evidence from the data was included as support for the analysis.
To answer the first and second guiding questions:
1. What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project?
68
2. What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project?
the data were kept in sequential order and coded twice. The first coding identified the
phase of problem posing the participants’ work represented, and the second code was
related to the themes of support and constraint developed from the data themselves.
The third question:
3. What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
was analyzed by dividing the data into subunits representing individual participants. The
coding for this question was conducted on the participant work at the beginning of the
problem posing process in the work of the peer journals, and coding was completed at
the end of the problem posing process by reviewing the action project, reflective
journals, and interviews. This provided comparative sets of data for each subunit that
could be utilized to answer the third question.
For the program logic model, “These immediate outcomes [will] in turn produce
… final or ultimate outcomes” (Yin, 1994, p. 118) as the supports and constraints are
analyzed holistically. So the data are analyzed at every phase of problem posing to
identify supports and constraints, and these points are considered when determining
how the overall class research experience was facilitated by a critical problem posing
process.
69
Instructional Methodology
This section provides a description and rationale of the instructional methodology
referred to throughout this dissertation. The plan for this research unit was based on the
phases of problem posing (Wink, 1997), and will describe the expected outcomes of
participant engagement. This unit was organized to provide an opportunity to embed the
problem posing process into a student research assignment that meets the district’s and
state’s requirements. Though the state requires student participation in the research
process in the English II curriculum, the district requires a paper as a final product.
Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS)
The public school curriculum of Texas is directed by the Texas Essential
Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). The TEKS strand on research for English II includes:
(13) Reading/inquiry/research. The student reads in order to research self-selected and assigned topics. The student is expected to:
(A) generate relevant, interesting, and researchable questions;
(B) locate appropriate print and non-print information using text and technical resources, including databases and the Internet;
(C) use text organizers such as overviews, headings, and graphic features to locate and categorize information;
(D) produce reports and research projects in varying forms for audiences; and
(E) draw conclusions from information gathered. (Chapter 110. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for English Language Arts and Reading: Subchapter c. High School, 1998)
70
Problem Posing Phases in Student Research
This section has been divided by the sections of Winks’ (1997) problem posing
phases, so that for each phase is connected directly to the classroom activities used to
provide the students an opportunity to engage in that phase.
Begin with Students’ Experience – Phase 1
To facilitate the students’ work with their experiences with social justice, a peer
journal activity was utilized. In these journals, students responded to their choices of
literature, prompts, or their peers as the journals rotated to the members of each peer
journal group. There were a total of six groups in the classroom; since each group had
four members, there were a total of 24 journals in which the students recorded their
responses over four days. Here are the instructions provided to the students.
Peer Journal Instructions:
� Respond to the literature or prompt for five minutes.
� Rotate the journals. Respond to the literature, the prompt, or your peer for five minutes.
� Rotate the journals. Respond to the literature, the prompt, or your peers for five minutes.
� Rotate the journals. Respond to the literature, the prompt or your peers for five minutes.
� Return the journal to the original writer.
Following these instructions, the students responded first to the literature or prompt and
then responded three more times in their peers’ journals either to the literature, the
prompt, or to their peers’ responses. The process allowed the students to engage in
71
conversations in the journals about the social issues that were presented through the
literature and prompts. The literature and prompts are presented in Table 3:
Table 3
Peer Journal Literature and Prompts
Literature Prompt
Demi –The Empty Pot Is cheating a problem at this school?
Langston Hughes “Theme for English B” Does this school teach all of the students
what they need to know?
Alice Childress “Mrs. James” What are the jobs in American that
American’s aren’t willing to do, and what
does that say about America?
John Meyer “Waiting for the World to
Change”
What are you waiting for?
(Childress, 1999; Demi, 1990; Hughes, 1951; Mayer, 2006)
The choice of these pieces and these prompts was made to encourage the students to
look critically at their environment and engage in a meaningful discussion with their
peers about issues that are relevant in their community. The expectation was that the
students would complete the first phase of Winks’ (1997) problem posing when the
students used their own experiences as the foundation for their work.
Identify, Investigate, Pose a Problem within Your Life – Phase 2
For the second phase, the goal of problem posing was for students to identify,
investigate, and pose a problem within their lives. This phase is important, as Greene
72
(1988) explained, because, “When people cannot name alternatives, imagine a better
state of things, share with others a project of change, they are likely to remain anchored
or submerged, even as they proudly assert their autonomy”(p. 9). Several steps were
used to accomplish this goal. First, the students read through their peers’ journals and
completed note cards with topics that they discovered in their writing. Then the students
were divided into groups, issued hall passes, and instructed to spend the first half of
class on a walk about in the high school building. Their job was to take their journal
around the building and take notes on things that they thought might make good
research topics. They were instructed to write down anything they thought might be
interesting, even if they did not want to pursue the topic themselves because it might
give another classmate an idea or suggestion for their topics. The students toured the
campus in groups, and returned at the designated time. When they arrived in the
classroom a long piece of butcher paper was stretched across two tables and labeled
the problem board. The topics from the peer journals, as identified on the note cards
were already written on the paper. As the students took turns sharing their ideas for
topics, they were added to the problem board as possible research topics.
For two more days, the students continued to bring in topics for the problem
board based on their observations in the hallways, their classes, at home, in the
community, and in the news. This initial part of the process affirmed the notion that the
best topics come from the students’ communities and their personal experiences
(McKenna & McKenna, 2000). They filled the butcher paper with topic choices, and the
problem board was taped to the frame of the window for use by the class. All of the
topics belonged to the class community.
73
With the problems identified, the students needed to make a decision about the
topics they would pursue. The class was offered the opportunity to pursue one single
topic as a whole class, or they could divide into groups, or they could work individually.
The class decided that they would prefer to work in groups or individually.
Ballenger (2007) posited that a good topic and question are significant, have the
potential of being answered, and present new questions. The students completed a
research question checklist (Appendix A) that asked for a topic, the names of the
students who were working on the topic, and a checklist to establish interest and
expectations. Time spent to assure that students had an engaging topic improved the
their success as they gathered information (McKenna & McKenna, 2000). With a topic
selected, the students then worked to find their research questions and potential
audiences. The expectation at this point was that the students would have chosen their
research topic and started to think about what resources they would need to present a
solution to live audiences. The students were told that they had a few days to think
about their choices and do some preliminary research. They could change their topic
selection up until the point we started collecting research.
As the students considered their topics, the first research model was introduced
to the students. The students viewed the film Supersize Me (Spurlock, 2003) and
completed a video guide (Appendix D) that required them to analyze the Spurlock’s
research methods as presented in the film. The students took notes on Spurlock’s use
of statistics, testimonials, surveys, and interviews. They considered what Spurlock’s
research question might have been, and they evaluated his use of film to reach his
audience using the film guide and in-class discussions. Another model was provided
74
when a student from the pilot study came to the class and shared her research product
from the year before. The students had the opportunity to ask questions. The film and
the student example offered students opportunities to see models of research (Luther,
2006), and they had an additional opportunity to see a student model that had
accomplished the assignment.
It was my expectation that at the end of this phase the students would have a
clear picture of what they needed to accomplish to complete a successful research
assignment that reached an audience beyond the classroom. The goal of these models
was to provide a clear description of what the students needed to do (Luther, 2006), and
to encourage them to reach their intended audience.
Solve the Problem Together – Phase 3
After the presentation of the models, students went to the computer lab to begin
their information search. In short lessons, students were shown how to determine the
credibility and reliability of sources using a reliability checklist (Appendix E) or use the
school’s databases for sources that were already reviewed and determined credible
(Derrico, 2006; Ruggieri, 2007; Steineke, 2002). The students also received some
simple instructions on conducting surveys and interviews. These primary sources would
count as one of the five required sources to encourage their use (Lyman, 2006). Also, to
encourage collaboration in the groups, the students were allowed to share a source with
another member of the group (Fairbanks, 1989). Even students who were working
individually were placed into groups to support questions and provide feedback
(Fairbanks, 1989).
75
A day in the classroom during the research collection phase was used to provide
a refresher on paraphrasing and to teach the students how to take notes using a double
column note format (Appendix F) that was created for this research assignment. This
organizer was built around a dialectical (Adelstein & Pival, 1994; Ballenger, 2007) or
double-column note format but was modified to meet the needs of student-researchers.
The template contained a box in which the students completed the bibliographic citation
before they started taking notes, so they did not misplace their source information. The
two columns below the box were used for tracking the information obtained in the
search. In the left column, students recorded quotes. In the right column, students
changed their quotes to paraphrases, and they added additional paraphrases of the text
as they moved through sources. A thin column between the two columns provided a
place for pages numbers for both quotes and paraphrases for later use. At the bottom of
the page, students completed a summary of the information collected from a given
source and stated how it would be used in their research.
Each day, as the students waited for their computers to log in, another model of
research was shared with the student participants (Luther, 2006). These included
excerpts from the books Nickel and Dimed on (Not) Getting by in America (Ehrenreich,
2001) and Fast Food Nation (Schlosser, 2001), the got milk marketing campaign ("got
milk?," 2008), and testimony presented to the State Board of Education and a
subsequent interview (Hu, 2008) published on the KVUE Website. Through these
models, I sought to help the students see how research is used beyond the classroom
and to provide them ideas for their own work.
76
When the students finished collecting their sources, they were required to turn in
the copies of their articles, surveys, interviews, or other sources with a double-column
notes sheet attached to the top. They were also expected to create an annotated
bibliography using the citation and summary from each of the notes pages. These were
turned in and scored as the first test grade of the unit.
With the research completed, the students began working on their research
summaries. The students were instructed on thesis development, and they began
writing their papers. The participants were asked to review their notes and their sources
with their partners. Then they put all of their source materials away and wrote freely
about their topic following a set of guided questions. When these drafts were completed,
they revised and supported their knowledge with the research they had obtained after
they had written the first draft of their papers.
There were many benefits to this approach. First it helped the participants find
their own voices in their writing. In addition, this approach also helped prevent the need
for participants to plagiarize (McColley et al., 1988; McMurtry, 2001; Szentkiralyi, 1996).
Because they could write in a narrative, first-person point of view (Ballenger, 2007;
Lyman, 2006; Steineke, 2002), they found their writing more fluid, and the experience
more personally satisfying. Finally, they referred to their sources to provide the textual
evidence and citations when they had a free-written first draft to support their research
summary (Ballenger, 2007).
The students structured their papers into a what, so what, now what format that
started with what led them to their topic and ended with a proposal to reach an authentic
audience. Each day as the students wrote their drafts, they spent part of the class
77
reading their writing and talking through their writing plans with other group members
(Fairbanks, 1989).
With completed drafts, the students went to the computer lab to type, revise and
edit their research summaries. Before the students began, the class as a whole, set up
the papers using MLA formatting, and a MLA guide was provided to help them check for
accuracy. To help prepare them for internal documentation and creating a works cited
page, the students had encountered another assignment early in the year where they
practiced these skills in a structured, all-class exercise (Northrup, 1997; Pfaffinger,
2006). The students were provided the research articles that they would need to support
a short essay on The Lord of the Flies (Golding, 1954). In this assignment, they
practiced citations, and they were reminded of the consequences of plagiarizing, and
encouraged to double check their citations in their document.
Once the research documents were digital, the students participated in revision
activities to improved research paragraphs as developed by Ballenger (2007). Ballenger
(2007) also suggested research revision by increasing active voice, varying sentence
length, checking clarity, and including transitions, and the students made revisions that
addressed these areas as well. Finally, the students completed an editing checklist,
considered common mistakes in their own work, rechecked their citations and MLA
formatting before they printed the final copy of their research summary.
The students were graded using a rubric (Appendix G) that was provided at the
beginning of the writing process. The rubric was created to closely resemble the rubric
used by the other teachers in the department who were teaching the same course to
assure grading equity. The district encouraged shared assessments to improve equity in
78
grading. The expectation at this point was that the students would have completed a
research summary that explained and then offered a solution that was developed with
their peers in their group. An additional expectation was that students would show
competence in the mechanical skills required in research writing.
Action – Phase 4
Upon completion of the action proposal as part of their research paper, the
students were ready to complete their action steps. They were provided three days to
work with their group (Fairbanks, 1989) to prepare a presentation that would reach an
authentic audience. Before they went to their audience, the students presented to the
class. On the presentation day, the students behaved as if they were talking to their
audience beyond the class. This provided an opportunity to practice their presentations
before a live audience, and it provided the class an opportunity to give some last
minutes suggestions to assure that the presentation was appropriate for the intended
audiences (Steineke, 2002). In addition, the students completed self-evaluations
(Appendix H) on their presentations.
At this point it was up to the students to complete their action. Students who
wrote letters brought them to the class and posted them in the school mail. Students
who were presenting to the administration were able to leave class to set up
appointments and give the presentations. Students who had letters for district
administrators or school personnel used the school interoffice mail system. The
students working with the school newspaper, media class, and announcement facilitator
were provided class time to approach and present their research (Burke, 2003; Slack,
79
2001). For students with audiences beyond the school, the action was completed on the
students’ own time, and they brought back evidence in the form of a signed note and a
copy of an email was sent to the audience and copied to the instructor.
Reflection
After the action phase of problem posing, the students had two opportunities to
reflect on their engagement with problem posing. First the students were asked to write
a reflection about their work with the research and their actions. After they completed
their reflection, the student responses were compared to the actual student work
completed. Below the student reflections, I asked the students questions about their
work and asked them to explain any discrepancies that I saw between what they
reported in their reflection and the work I had collected. The students then responded to
the questions or discrepancies in a final journal entry. In addition, the students
completed a short interview at the end of the process in which they orally answered
general questions about their participation in problem posing.
Project Timeline
This basic timeline (Table 4) in this section provides the actual dates that the
participants were engaged in the study. The comments were included to help explain
gaps of time or provide details to help situate the setting of this study in the classroom.
This timeline is followed by the findings of this study organized by the guiding questions.
80
Table 4
Assignment Timeline
Dates Student Participation Comments
December 17, 2007
January 22, 2008
Peer Journals Two of these weeks were
Christmas break.
January 22, 2008
January 28, 2008
Participant Walk About,
Brainstorming, Problem
Board
January 29, 2008
January 30, 2008
Topics Chosen
January 31, 2008
February 8, 2008
Participants gathered
information from sources.
February 21, 2008
February 22, 2008
Participants analyzed
research model.
The model was Supersize
Me. (NOTE: Participants
worked with a substitute).
March 10, 2008
March 25, 2008
Participants used their
research to complete
research summaries.
From February 22nd until
March 10th, the participants
left their research activities
to prepare for the annual
TAKS test.
March 25, 2008
March 28, 2008
Participants worked to
prepare their research for a
live audience.
(table continues)
81
Dates Student Participation Comments
April 22, 2008 Journal Reflections
April 25, 2008 Member Check on Journal
Reflections
April 30, 2008 Participant Interviews
Collection of data throughout the research unit enabled the research questions to be
addressed.
Instructional Methodology Summary
In this section the research assignment was described to provide the reader with
an understanding of the class assignments given to the students. This sectional also
serves to provide the expectations set for the students as they participated in the Wink’s
(1997) problem posing process and the research assignment.
The students began with their own experiences as they participated in the peer-
journal activity with the social justice topics. Then the students worked together to
identify, investigate, and pose a problem within their lives as they did the walk about in
the school and contributed possible topics from their lives to the class problem board.
Then they supported each other as they solved their problems together with their
groups. These groups shared sources, listened to ideas, provided feedback, and helped
peers achieve their goals. Finally in the action phase, the students took the work they
completed together and presented their solutions to an authentic audience.
Table 4 (continued).
82
Summary of Methodology
The purpose of this study was to develop a case to confirm, refine, or elaborate
the supports and constraints as the participants in this single case study worked through
Wink’s (1997) problem posing process embedded into the participants’ research
assignment. A group of participating students were identified in a north Texas high
school for this case study. Ten participants represented the subgroups for a single case
study that explained the causal relationship between the problem posing activities and
transformation gained through participation in critical literacy in a chronologically linear
approach with multiple sources and data points.
The research question for this study was What were the supports and constraints
to problem posing as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating
in this secondary research project? To answer this question, data were analyzed using
the following guiding questions:
1. What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project? 2. What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project? 3. What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
As the participants engaged in the problem posing activities, the data were collected
stored in a database to improve the reliability of the analysis. The analysis focused on
the guiding questions and the final report was organized to address each of these
questions specifically using the data collected. The data were accessed both in
83
sequential order and by individual student to answer the guiding question. The final
results of the study depended on the data collected from the linear model and from the
collection of information from the subunits considered holistically. The instructional
methodology followed the problem posing process and provided a framework for the
students’ work.
The instructional methodology was followed in the classroom, and the students
produced the data required to complete the study methodology as described in this
chapter. In Chapter 4, Findings, the participants will be introduced and the analysis of
the data will follow. The analysis is organized into three sections that address each of
the three guiding questions from this study.
84
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
Student Research in the Classroom
The data for this study were collected in a tenth grade, English II classroom at a
north Texas high school during the spring semester of 2008. The class consisted of
eighteen students; ten of whom agreed to participate in the study. Each of these
participants will be introduced in a short vignette to establish the personal context of
their experiences in the study. These vignettes and a brief statement about the timeline
for conducting the study preface a presentation of the findings related to the three
research questions of the study. This chapter ends with the presentation of the findings
for the third question as reflected by the individual students who are introduced here.
The participants worked on a student research unit that was aligned to Wink’s
problem posing process as described in Chapter 2. The instructional plan and expected
outcomes are provided in Chapter 3. The student research assignment is a traditional
multi-step assignment within the English curriculum of the school in which the study was
conducted. The assignment is completed in the spring semester of English II, and it is
the largest assignment of the school year in both scope and grading weight. The
assignment continued over six weeks and led to student production of many artifacts.
The traditional multi-step assignment for this study was embedded into Wink’s problem
posing process. The work produced by the participants and the interviews conducted at
the completion of the assignment make up the data for this study.
85
The Participants
Ten students participated in this study. In an effort to introduce them in ways that
reveal their personal attitudes and beliefs, I will utilize their own words from in-class
writing and interviews in these individual vignettes. The student quotes are represented
as they appeared in their work without any grammatical or structural changes. Each
vignette starts with my personal reflection on the student based on classroom
observations.
Mark
Mark is very quiet in class. He completes all of his work but rarely goes beyond
the requirements of the assignment. He has a strong bond with several other
participants in the class as they have a long history of participating in athletics together.
At the beginning of the unit, a journal assignment had the participants listening to the
song “Waiting for the World to Change” by John Meyer. In response to the question
“What are you waiting for?,” Mark responded, “I am waiting for the new semester to end
and I am waiting for summer to begin.” However, in response to his peers’ journals he
added:
People who value money and are powerful won’t find love because some chick will just want that guy for his money. [Bethany] is right because you have to go change your life because the world’s not going to change your life for you. I don’t think Americans are waiters. I think some are spoiled and have everything handed to them. Until that one day when there’s no one but themselves they will be waiters.
At the end of his research paper, Mark set as his goal for action to combat the problems
of academic dishonesty. Working with two other participants, James and Justin, Mark
stated his goal as:
86
Now I plan to get the word out in my school. I plan to make a brochure showing our audience that which is teacher’s information and statistics of school cheating that goes on in our school at [School Name] and schools all over the nation. I will also provide tips on how to prevent cheating in the classroom. To reach our audience my partners and I will put our brochures in all the teacher’s mail boxes and have a meeting with Mr. [Hook],[principal].
Mark and his partners were successful in reaching their audience of the school teachers
with the permission of the principal. In his final reflection Mark wrote:
I used my literacy and communication skills to solve cheating by discussing the situation with Mr. [Gomez] and I used literacy and made a brochure of cheating research to try to solve the cheating problem at this school… My work made a difference because every little bit helped our project.
Justin
Academically very strong, Justin has very good oral and written communication
skills. He enjoys controversial topics and is open to new ideas presented by his peers
during discussions. He is thoughtful in his work and seems to enjoy challenging
assignments. In response to Meyer’s song “Waiting for the World to Change,” Justin
responded that he is waiting for
...all wars to end. War is very devastating and hardly any good comes out of it. This earth would be a much better place w/o war. Countries would not fight over land, or oil, or power and this would make everyone friendlier. …We shouldn’t just go out and blow someone up for not helping us in our own war. That would just make everyone sure that Americans are horrible people.
Justin planned with Mark and James to complete a group research project, and in his
individual paper, he identified his goal for the project as
When I have completed this brochure, I plan to share this source of information with the teachers of my school by putting a copy of the brochure in each of the teachers’ mailboxes inside the office. If this plan goes according to plan, I believe that this school could see a significant change in the cheating happening within the school. …If these new methods of preventing cheating are applied consistently, I think that schools will start to see drastic improvements within their systems and they will no longer have to worry about cheating. I think that lowering the cheating rate can be done as long as we take baby steps at first.
87
Taking huge long strides at it won’t work because people will make huge alterations only a few times and then they will give up. … I believe the true key to this plan is consistency.
In his reflection after he completed his project, Justin shared how he used tools
and communicated his ideas to his audience. In addition, he incorporated an idea from
the dean of students by encouraging participants to get involved in taking action against
student cheating too.
I used internet resources to do my research to obtain helpful information about my topic. I communicated with my group members to formulate a presentation to show to the classroom and to put together an interview with the dean of students. ... I think I will use these skills numerous times throughout my life and my time in high school. … I think that students are more capable of changing a topic like this because students can catch other students easier than teachers can.
James
Though James is very quiet in class, often appearing almost listless, his writing is
strong and his arguments are well supported. James applies instruction quickly and
correctly to his work with ease. He also works well in his cooperative groups, rarely
taking a leadership role, but still making meaningful contributions to the group product.
When James responded to Meyer’s song “Waiting for the World to Change,” he said,
“People are always waiting for other people to go out and change the world. They think
someone will do it, so they don’t take the initiative to make an impact.” In response to
his peers he added,
I agree with [nonparticipant]. I don’t think we should blow up France. Just because they didn’t back us in Iraq doesn’t mean we should wipe out their entire country. …War is a disastrous event that I hope to never participate in. The thought of being out in a battle field is a scary thing. If there were no war, the earth would be a much better place.
88
In his group with Mark and Justin, James had the most extensive plan for dealing with
cheating in his research paper. It went beyond the product and addressed school and
classroom policies.
In order for cheating to be prevented, there must be a team effort. School must enact successful policies and throw out old ones that have not been working. Teachers must take the responsibility of reporting any known instances of cheating. …Different test forms should be used and teachers should never ever leave the classroom when tests are out. … Also, teachers must be notified of new cheating techniques and the signs of cheating. … Students need to realize how dishonest cheating is and the integrity problems that are involved. … Teachers need to be informed about the cheating epidemic occurring throughout our nation and in our very own [School Name] High School where a survey found that 20 out of 20 people surveyed had cheated. This scary statistic along with many others will be placed in a comprehensive brochure. Optimally, I hope that a committee is created to work to stop and prevent cheating in our high school.
James worked with his team to create the brochure. Though James was quiet through
most of the meeting with the principal, his work was central to the discussion. In
reflection on this unit, James said,
…I read the research sources and then applied the research to my paper. I used research to try to solve my problem by finding statistics that supported my solution to the problem and to provide evidence that the problem existed. I used communication skills with presenting my ideas to Mr. [Gomez]. Persuasive communication skills were used in order to get my ideas and solution approved.
…We got approval to distribute it. I think it could make a difference if teachers respond to the brochure. I would follow this plan to deal with another issue that I care about.
Noah
Though Noah struggles cognitively to organize his ideas, he puts forth a
tremendous effort on all of his assignments and exhibits a high level of confidence.
However, his disorganized thoughts are prevalent in the confusion of his writing. In
response to Meyer’s song “Waiting for the World to Change,” Noah wrote that he was
89
“waiting for [his] life to change into something better. But for some people, the only thing
that they are waiting for something within their life to change.” In response to his peers,
he said,
Exactly you have to be patient and wait, because the time will come and it will change before you know it. The reason why I’m patient is b/c and I don’t hurry into everything and if I do it will be bad b/c it will be lack of patience. …I totally agree with [Morgan] and [nonparticipant]. Nothing ever goes your way until you make your future with what your starting and keep on going. … But know studying means that you are not going to have a good job or good life.
Noah chose to work on his own to complete a project on parking incentives. Though it
was clear that he thought the school should have incentives, he did not know why we
needed them or who would be getting them. In the end, I had to provide guiding
questions to organize his work. In his research paper, Noah identified his action.
I might have an interview with Mr. [Hook] who is the principle of our school and with Mrs. [nonparticipant] who is the head or responsible of the parking areas and even with some of the seniors and see what their point of view is and their opinion about the school’s parking lot because it tells me what we should do for our school and how we should use the student’s incentives.
Noah worked hard on this project, and he was proud of his action. He followed through
with his project and met with the dean of students to request support for his action plan.
Here is how he described it in his journal.
I use some library resources and searched for what I need for my assignment. I had an interview with one of the assistant principles. My research was about students with incentives for parking spots. … Mr. [Gomez] said that they will think about it and they will talk to the staff of the parking lot. …I can have researches improve in my world if I have more interviews and talk to different people.
Seth
Academically, Seth is successful because of his hard work, but he does find
writing assignments challenging. Seth is socially awkward and not confident with his
90
peers. He is reluctant to speak up in class because he is uncomfortable at the center of
attention. However, one-on-one, Seth is easy to talk to and has dreams of becoming a
movie producer. He looks forward to college and the world beyond. He looks at high
school as an obstacle to overcome, so he can get on to what he wants to do. In his peer
journal he responded to Meyer’s “Waiting for the World to Change” with
I’m waiting for summer vacation to come. Also for the time I become an adult & get a job. … I’m waiting to graduate from school, pass out of college, get a good job, and when I get enough times’ money I’ll make a movie. …What do you want people to remember you as? Do you want people to remember you in a bad way, or a good way?
Concerned about the music played over the intercom system during passing
periods (the time period between classes), Seth’s action was to talk to the
administration about diversifying the soundtrack. In his research paper, he described his
goal.
If they played different stations every day, it would probably be better. …I think we ought to play some other music… but at least for variety. …I am not sure who is in charge of the music, but whoever it is, I want to talk to him or her about this. …They should probably put up a survey on Blackboard as to what their favorite music is and they should play the most popular music in school, if it’s “good” music.
Seth wrote a letter to the dean of students requesting consideration of his ideas, and in
his project reflection he said that he “looked up many articles to support [his] research”
and he “put the letter in Mr. [Gomez’s] box.” However at the date of the entry, he had
not received a response although he did note that the music on the loudspeakers had
stopped entirely, and he wondered if there was a connection between his voiced
concern and the end of the passing period music.
91
Brett
With a good attitude toward his school work, Brett takes his assignments to heart
and puts his best foot forward. In addition to a healthy approach to academics, Brett is
the only participant who came into this assignment with experience in service work. As
a member of student council, Brett has worked on the school turkey drive and teacher
appreciation activities. He also participated in service work in his middle school where
he was active in a school garden project. Though he is somewhat shy, he seems to be
able to push through this when he feels it is important to speak up. In response to
Meyer’s song, Brett wrote that he is waiting for the “world to change. I am waiting for my
life to be changed in some way. That my life will impact the whole world. I need to stop
waiting and get into the action.” In response to his peers, he added,
I am waiting for, like Seth said, to finish high school, college, and to find a good job that pays good. But I don’t want it to go too fast and fly by because we only have one life. … I agree with Morgan because not everything does go your way. And when it doesn’t people need to take responsibility for their mistake. They need to take it upon themselves to fix the problem.
Brett’s action project was to present to the local athletic association a proposal to open
up some fields in some of the local parks for free play time. He was concerned that
citizens could be fined for playing on city fields without permission. He identified his goal
in his research paper as
I hope to improve this issue by letting a park be for public use only. I believe that [parks] should be open to the public and for teams to practice. The other parks… should be used for game fields and kept in good condition. I am going to personally confront the City Council of [City Name] or the Parks and Recreation Department and ask if this could be done…
Though Brett did make contact with these organizations when he conducted interviews
during his research phase, he did not follow through with the final presentation to these
92
boards leaving his action incomplete. In his journal reflection, Brett commented that
“today is my first day with little homework. I am going to see if I could do it today. I am
not trying to avoid it because it’s my opinion and I just hope that they accept it and try to
help me out.”
Bethany
Formerly identified with dyslexia, Bethany is working towards a successful
transition to on-level work. Her academic voice and ideas are strong, but her
organization, development, and mechanics are weak but improving at a rapid pace. Part
of the reason for this improvement is her hard work, but she has also made a significant
change in her attitude toward reading. She was a reluctant reader at the beginning of
the school year, and she is now an active reader. The librarian also described her as an
active reader at the end of the school year. In response to the song “Waiting for the
World to Change” by Meyer, Bethany wrote,
Weird that your waiting to write about waiting but shouldn’t have to rely on other people in life because for the most part they will let you down. …a great man once said… “When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will be at peace” – Bob Marley And I believe what he say is true and world would be a better place. You can’t sit around and wait for the world to change on its own, get out there and change it for yourself or you will just be waiting. …I agree with [Nathan] there is not time, we only have one life on earth, why not just start now and change it! I will be interested to see how [Nathan] changes the world.
Unfortunately, Bethany struggled with her work on the research paper. She started off
working with a peer, Morgan, on the study hall topic. However, Bethany initially
struggled with finding sources. Though I was working with her, when the first due date
came around Bethany showed up with a completed set of notes on a topic that we had
not developed in class, marijuana. A problem board had been developed by the class,
93
and all of the topics had been approved. This topic was not an eligible topic, but
because this participant struggles, and she had clearly worked very hard on her own to
complete the assignment, I felt that it would be more of a set-back than she could
overcome if I asked her to redo her research. I reluctantly agreed to let her do the
assignment with the understanding that she would investigate both sides of the issue. I
needed her to present both sides of the issue so that my job would not be at stake for
allowing a student to complete research that supported use of an illegal substance.
However, by adding this stipulation to her assignment, I pulled her out of the problem
posing process which would likely have ended with a persuasive product instead of the
comparative product. My limitations on Bethany probably diminished her success. The
specifics will be addressed later in this chapter. Bethany still put forward a great effort,
and here is the goal she set at the end of her research paper.
I believe this to be an either or situation. Maybe once people read this article on marijuana they will become educated, and that is all that is wanted, so that they don’t make that final decision on just from what you have heard or by the society is incorrect.
Bethany’s frustration was clear at the end of the process when she wrote her final
reflection.
Well it’s just that it is such a big controversy, and if I could redo I would not do it again, one because you [Ms. Revelle] have a biast opinion on it, and it just a hard subject fitting so much valuable information in to a small research paper. I’m very disappointed on how bad I did, as in a grade yet I tried so hard. I don’t believe I am changed.
Neal
Best friends with Nathan, these two participants will always choose to work
together on class assignments rather than work alone. They are both athletes who play
94
both football and basketball. Neal struggles academically on complex assignments, but
with his good friend Nathan, he is able to keep up with his work. His work is slow and
deliberate, but he rarely moves beyond the surface of a concept. To outsiders, Neal
seems confident, but in reality, Nathan actually does most of the talking for both of them
to the extent that during instruction, Nathan will answer questions posed to Neal. So it
was not a surprise that Nathan and Neal worked together on the final project to
complete the action of their research assignment.
In response to “Waiting for the World to Change” by Meyer, Neal responded “I’m
not really sure what I am waiting for. So I’m just going to wait to read the next person’s
writing and add onto that.” After he read his peer’s responses, he added
…I agree with [Bethany], [Nathan], and [Mark], and [nonparticipant] about changing the world, You can’t wait for it to do it by itself. … Yes, for once [Nathan] makes sense. Oh, and I wasn’t aware that you were change the world? What do you do to change the world [Nathan]?
In his research paper, he pursued the job market to see what jobs were marketable for
students getting ready to start college even though he was not really interested in the
topic. I suspect that this was Nathan’s topic, and Neal just followed along. In his
research paper, his action was unclear.
I need to come up with a way to get all of that information out to kids who are looking for a job to pursuit. I have decided to do that by writing a letter to a company or business asking them certain things about jobs and what it takes to obtain a decent one.
Though this description is unclear, by the time the participants were ready to present
their projects for action, Neal and Nathan had planned to write letters to one of their
sources who teaches a career course at a local university to come and present a lecture
on the hot jobs in the current market, and they wrote an additional letter to the principal
95
to ask him to make the arrangements for this guest-speaker to come. Though the letters
were written, I was never provided evidence that they were sent, even after multiple
requests. Here is Neal’s final reflection.
I used communication skills by e-mailing Mr. [Audience Name] and asking him to come and talk to our school. … I’m not really sure what problem there was with the topic of jobs, all I did was get research of information off of the web and determined which jobs would be best for young adults. …Yes, I did e-mail him and I thought I copied it to you but I will be sure to take care of that no later than this weekend.
Nathan
Best friends with Neal, Nathan is the most confident of the two. Very self-aware,
Nathan was the only participant to recognize the power of change within himself in the
early phases of the problem posing process. Nathan maintains a great deal of control
over his circumstances, speaking up when he has concerns and planning for his own
success. Nathan seems to understand his teachers and the content very well, and he
completes his work to an acceptable level without putting much effort forward. His effort
is saved for his two favorite pursuits, sports and girls. In this class, Bethany is the object
of his affection. In response to Meyer’s song “Waiting for the World to Change,” Nathan
replied,
Me waiting for something NO, I am not waiting I am changing. I am trying to be the one who takes action in to my own hands. Other people wait for me. I change the world. ..America used to be a bunch of doers now were a bunch of waiters, always letting people choose our paths and like now we always sit and wait for our friends to pick something to do, God just pick something and go with it. You know? … I am waiting for [Bethany] to call me haha, … [Bethany] Those are the most truthful words ever spoken ☺ They are so down to earth and real life I thought that this is the best topic ever, Good job. I agree 100%.
When Nathan was writing his research paper, he still didn’t have a clear goal in mind. At
the point he wrote his plan for action he stated, “I would like to try to find a head hunter
96
organization that would listen to me. When I do find one I want to partner up with them
and see if I could help them… help those kids decide a career path....”
Though he wasn’t sure of his path when he wrote up his research, Nathan was
ready for the presentations. Nathan blames Neal that the action didn’t happen in his
final reflection.
I believe Neal has sent it to him, well he says he has so IDK [I don’t know], you will have to ask Mr. [Neal], every time I ask him he gets mad. I chose this topic because I am in the stages of trying to pick my career path so I thought I should do some research to try and help myself and others out. Yes, I was pleased with the results, but it didn’t affect me that much.
Morgan
A strong voice in the class, Morgan is a doer. She actively seeks the resources
she needs for success, coming in for extra tutoring or extra credit if her grade drops too
low. Though she sometimes struggles academically, she has set high personal goals for
herself and expects to do well. When she does not, she increases her efforts to improve
her achievement. At the beginning of the problem posing process, Morgan responded to
”Waiting for the World to Change” by Meyer with the following:
What am I waiting for? I’m waiting for people to grow up and realize not everything goes your way and people need to take responsibility for their own actions and to quit blaming others for their mistakes and problems. …That’s good at least you have a plan and you’re not a lazy bum like most kids at our school! … I want to be remembered as someone that did good or helped others…
Morgan decided that the school needed a study hall similar to one at a school she had
previously attended, and she researched and planned to make this happen at this
school in her research paper. She stated her goal.
What I am planning on doing to help promote the decision of having study hall is I would like to create a visual presentation, PowerPoint, to show the counselors of [School Name] that study hall is highly needed for the higher education of
97
students. I answered my question by finding information on how study hall benefits a school and how it improves the grades of students. The expected results I hope to notice would be that the principle would consider letting students have study hall as an after school or in school class, and that it would be approved by the [Name of the School District].
When it was time to present, Morgan had made some changes to her plan. Instead of
presenting to the counselors, she set up an appointment with the principal and put
together a presentation. She argued the need for study hall at the school to the dean of
students. When she reflected in the journal at the end of the process, Morgan
explained,
Research came from people I surveyed and online articles. And communication by surveying 30 kids at [School Name] and gave a public presentation to Mr. [Gomez]. I was looking for how study hall helps the academic society greatly & I was researching that. I decided on this topic because I would really like study hall at the school.
These ten students were the participants in this study.
Guiding Questions
As the students worked through the phases of the problem posing process within
the framework of the research assignment, several factors both supported and hindered
the process. These factors will be considered through the first of the two guiding
questions for this study.
1. What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project? 2. What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project?
A third question addresses the impact of the critical problem posing on the individual
students.
98
3. What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
Answers to these questions will be explored through systematic examination of specific
instances and examples provided from the journals, artifacts and interviews of the
participants in order to provide a deep description and triangulation through multiple
sources.
Support for Problem Posing
What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project?
The data from this study suggest that there were several classroom and
instructional elements that supported problem posing. The themes related to support
coincide with the phases of problem posing (Wink, 1997). As the students moved
through the phases, their needs changed and the themes of support were dependent on
the phase of problem posing where the data were situated. Therefore, this analysis is
organized around the problem posing process, reviewed in Figure 1. The student
quotes are represented as they appeared in their work without any grammatical or
structural changes.
Begin with Students’ Experience – Phase 1
The student-experience phase of the problem posing process consisted of peer
journaling. Participants responded to a piece of literature, a prompt, and each other to
explore teacher provided issues in relation to their own experiences. In this phase, two
themes of support were observed in the data:
99
(a) When participants brought prior knowledge about the topic into their work with the peer journals, it provided a foundation for discussing serious local and global issues.
(b) The nature of the community provided through the peer journals allowed each participant a voice, an interactive audience and immediate feedback that encouraged a deep dialogue and extended connections.
The peer journal activity took place over four days. Four pieces of literature were
provided along with coordinating prompts. The participants were encouraged to respond
to the literature, the prompt, or each other as the journals moved from student to
student. Each student was assigned a “home” journal for the beginning of the activity,
and every five minutes the journals rotated around the room. Either four or five
participants responded in each journal. Table 3 contains a list of literature pieces and
prompts used for this activity.
Prior Knowledge
When participants brought prior knowledge about the topic into their work with peer journals, it provided a foundation for discussing serious local and global issues.
The peer journal assignment started with a topic that all of the participants had
experienced firsthand, cheating. In the children’s book The Empty Pot by Demi, the
protagonist is recognized and rewarded for being honest. However, the students’
personal experiences with cheating were different, as pointed out by James. “Cheating
causes inaccurate test grades… Unfortunately, cheaters aren’t always caught like in the
story, “The Empty Pot,” making participants feel cheating is rewarded,” he said. In the
school, Seth reported that “I personally saw one kid in one of my classes during a test,
100
asking me for the answer to a question.” Nathan reflected that “most see this as a
problem but I see it as a way of life…,” and described the evolution of cheating as “they
just copy off of a friend’s paper, or use the internet, or whatever. Kids have brought
cheating to a whole new level now-a-days.” James added, “Just last week students in
an AP history class had to retake a test since they cheated when a sub was there. After
1st period, answers to tests fly around and people look up answers to the question that
their friends couldn’t figure out.”
Other participants brought in previous knowledge from outside the school. Justin
compared the cheating to steroid use in baseball: “Steroids are becoming more and
more prevalent through-out the leagues and athletes are taking the easy way out.”
James shared that his mom had struggled with cheating in the workplace, stating
“cheating has a domino effect that doesn’t stop once school is over. Cheating in the
business world can occur when you say you did the work that your partner did. Taking
credit for someone’s work is a problem in business.”
Once the participants had worked through the topic of cheating, a topic that they
had all experienced and held opinions about, they were comfortable with the peer
journal process and ready to take on the topic of equality in education with the Hughes’
poem “Theme from English B.” Though the goal for this prompt was for participants to
consider the school and its curriculum in relation to the cultural and social needs of the
participants, they tended to share their personal experiences related to specific content
and personal experiences of their courses. For example Mark shared that “The lessons
we learn at school have nothing to do with our experiences like when do I need to use
radicals or when am I going to use the periodic table, never.” Another participant,
101
James, recognized a disconnect between a class activity and reality. He wrote, “Just
today in physics class we did problems that said [for us] to neglect friction. Friction is
always present in our world.” Some participants shared experiences that called for a
different approach entirely. Morgan wanted her educational experiences to be more
benevolent, sharing that “if school would focus more on trying to help starving
children… we’d be 10x better off.” Many participants questioned the importance of the
memory work experiences encountered including the date of birth of President Lincoln
(Morgan), the Pythagorean Theorem (Morgan), making tiramisu (Mark), and matrices
(Neal). Each of these participants questioned the importance of memorizing information
without a clear understanding of how the information would be used beyond the
classroom. Only Bethany thought that if “we cared about the things we learned or had
more interest in it we most likely would have much better grades.” However, it isn’t clear
if she meant that the curriculum should be more interesting or if the participants should
be more interested.
In response to the third prompt and the short story “Mrs. James,” a story of an
African-American house keeper who stands up to her boss when her boundaries are not
respected, the participants connected their understanding of immigration and “the jobs
Americans won’t do” (Bush, 2005). Some participants chose to respond to this issue by
listing. “Some jobs that Americans won’t do consist of garbage man, roof houses,
janitor, mow lawns, and stuff similar that are too nasty for us American’s,” said Brett.
Morgan pointed out that her experience had led her to believe “people love money and
are lazy.” Mark reflected that “Americans need to man up and do whatever is necessary
to get money” and Justin recognized the importance of the work done by immigrants
102
when he shared that “Immigrants do most of the toughest, nasty jobs that American’s
won’t do. Immigrants almost make up the backbone of the manual labor in America.”
The last prompt was explicitly planned to move participants away from identifying
and discussing issues and toward a place where they could look ahead and plan for the
changes necessary to address societal issues and concerns. The literature, a song, and
the prompt were abstract. However, participants still built their responses around their
previous experiences and knowledge. Bethany warned others off waiting and counting
on others because “for the most part, they will let you down.” Mark, still connecting to
his discussion about immigration, shared that he did not “think American’s were waiters.
[He] think[s] some are spoiled and have everything handed to them.” James also looked
beyond himself to state that “people are always waiting for other people to go out and
change the world. They think someone will do it, so they don’t take the initiative to make
an impact.” Though these answers do not have the specific evidence of earlier
examples tying them directly to the participants’ prior experiences and knowledge, they
do conceptually capture their experiences, and they mirror the abstract, conceptual
nature of the song and the prompt.
Through the peer journals, the participants in the study were able to connect their
personal experiences to literature and prompts provided by me in relation to current
issues. This background knowledge related to the topic provided a foundation for
problem posing. This was supported by the immediate feedback provided by peer
response that occurred in the peer journal activity.
103
Peer Response
The nature of the community provided through the peer journals allowed each participant a voice, an interactive audience, and immediate feedback which encouraged a deep dialogue and extended connections. Peer response provided an immediate audience for participant responses and
fueled a deep dialogue and extended connections for discussing serious local and
global issues in the peer journals. Participants started by making a statement or sharing
a belief, and as soon as the journal rotated, their writing received feedback. The
responses of the participants to these journal entries varied with the topics and the
claims made by their peers. At times, participants agreed, supported and contributed to
a statement, but at other times, they challenged and refuted the claims made by their
peers. Some participants even changed their opinions based on what their peers
contributed. Together these elements provided a deeper understanding of the issues
presented and extended the prior experiences and knowledge of all of the participants.
For example, on the topic of cheating, most participants agreed that the problem
existed in the school and provided examples to support their statements. However,
some participants used their response opportunities to challenge the problem and the
attitudes of others towards cheating. Bethany pointed out that “still you don’t learn your
lessons for college and so forth,” and Neal added that the “students spend more time
coming up with ways to cheat then studying for the test” adding that “if you do cheat,
you’re only hurting yourself.” Additionally, participants responded to cheating
experiences by sharing the collective down side of cheating, claiming that “people who
actually study and listen in class look like they didn’t because they might get and 82 on
a test. The people who cheat, however, get like 97’s on their tests and now it just isn’t
104
fair to the people who actually did study.” James shared this concern adding that
“cheating causes inaccurate test grades and can cause a less of a curve for participant
who didn’t cheat.”
Other participants responded to peers with excuses for cheating. Morgan shared
the “pressure of wanting to be perfect” while Seth described cheating as “more of a
desperate thing.” Only Nathan wrote to support the current practice of his peers’
cheating by responding that “there are tricks to be learned and ways to never be
caught” after Bethany and Neal had expressed concerns of being caught. Because of
the peer responses, each participant moved beyond their own understanding. They
read the opinions and experiences of others and related, confronted or contributed in
their responses.
When the participants responded to the prompt from the poem “Theme from
English B” by Langston Hughes, they were primarily supportive of each others’
perceptions of school experiences. Neal summed this up best when he replied to
Bethany saying,
We don’t care about anything we learn about so we all just blow it off and don’t care or anything. If it were subjects we cared about, then we could all relate what we learn to our own life experience.
There were some exceptions though. James responded to Justin’s discussion of the
influence of wealth with the following comment: “A person’s wealth can get them almost
out of everything.” Few participants disagreed with their disgruntled peers, but Bethany
pointed out to Nathan that he needed to know his history to be prepared for his future,
and Justin disagreed with James’ statement about team building activities not being
“successful in the real world” with
105
I also think that participating in the team building activities provides its own lesson. If you don’t learn to interact with the people in your group, then how are you going to interact with the people in your job, who you have never seen before, who may be from different states, not just different middle schools?
“Mrs. James” and the topic of immigration provided an opportunity for participants
to challenge their peers’ stereotypes and assumptions. Brett changed opinions based
on a peer response, after Brett provided a general description of the levels of food
preparation; Mark perceived a negative inference and said, “that’s being racist.” Bret
responded saying “I agree with what Mark said. People that come from other countries
come to get money for their family at home. They do what they have to do to survive.
Nathan took issue with Bethany’s comment that American’s were lazy by saying “I ain’t
no pansy… I freaking build stuff and work on roofs and do construction… And
Americans get the job done.” Bethany responded again to Nathan saying “but why do a
job when you can have someone do it for you, I mean that is how many make a living in
American, doing something for someone else.” Mark joined this conversation pointing
out that “First off not all people who “roof” a house is Mexican, but some Americans
wouldn’t be mentally strong enough to build a house” after Neal said “What? No
compreindo. …most American’s do not roof houses, it usually is people of the Mexican
decent.” James too had to revoke his previous statement that “Most Americans don’t
mow lawns” stating that “I guess now I have found out that a lot of people do mow their
own lawns.”
Peer responses to “Waiting for the World to Change” helped solidify the abstract
responses initially made by relying on previous knowledge. Once participants engaged
together, the context moved from the abstract conception of change to the specifics of
106
the action needed for change to occur in today’s society. Brett thought it was important
for people to “take it upon themselves to fix the problem” in response to Morgan’s
comment that “people need to take responsibility for their own actions and quit blaming
others for their mistakes and problems.” Morgan congratulated Seth for having “a plan”
in response to his goal of making enough money so he could “make a movie.”
After Mark described “Americans as waiters,” Nathan shared with his group that
“America used to be a bunch of doers now we’re a bunch of waiters, always letting
people choose our paths,” prompting this reply from Bethany, “We only have one life on
Earth, why not just start now and change it.” Justin’s and James’ conversation centered
on war. James agreed with a nonparticipant that the United States should not “blow up
France” and expressed that “war is a disastrous event that [he] hoped to never
participate in.” Justin added that “War is very devastating and hardy any good comes
out of it… Countries would not fight over land, or oil, or power and this would make
everyone friendlier.”
Perhaps because the students received immediate feedback, they were
supported and challenged by their peers to be more accurate. In addition, the peer
responses added new perspectives to each participant’s perspective on the issues at
hand. The students worked together to create a collective personal experience. In the
next phase of the problem posing process, the students work collaboratively to identify,
investigate and pose problems within their own lives.
107
Identify, Investigate, Pose a Problem within Your Life – Phase 2
In this phase of the problem posing process, participants engaged in several
instructor-led activities to explore potential topics. The peer journals, as described in
relation to this experience, provided a foundation for the participants to build their own
problems and gave them the opportunity to interact with teacher provided issues before
they explored their own. At this point in the process, participants needed both to identify
and to start their investigations, and they were provided an opportunity for a walk about
where they walked around the school with their peers to make a list of problems in and
around the school that could be potential topics for their research and action. After the
walk about, the participants brainstormed a list of problems and were instructed to
continue their search at home and in the community. The class continued to add to the
problem board for several days. From the problem board, participants chose their topics
and began checking for resources to support their study. This phase of the problem
posing process seemed to be supported in two ways:
(a) The opportunities for students to collaborate seemed to support them as they identified their problem
(b) Participants were able to clarify their focus and define issues for investigation based on the information provided from surveys and interviews.
Collaboration of Ideas
The opportunities for students to collaborate seemed to support them as they
identified their problem. Idea generating occurred in the class with involvement from all
of the participants. All participants contributed to the problem board and the board was
the property of every participant. Though some participants decided to use a problem
they had personally posed to the board, others chose topics of interest that were posed
108
by others. The participants used several sources to identify their problems. First, they
were instructed to review their peer journals for ideas. These generated the obvious
issues: cheating, school curriculum, immigration, and American jobs. The participants
then took a walk about in the school to search for more topics. On their walk about,
participants found problems with the upkeep of the school bathrooms and a discrepancy
in the facilities of different athletic departments. Also, the participants looked for more
concerns at home and in the community. Community problems included the availability
of parks and increased pollution. Table 5 contains the complete list created by the
participants on the problem board.
109
Table 5
Problem Board List
- Gangs - Nap Time - Pessimism - Football Lounge - Cheating - Holidays - Cameras - Apathy - Parking - U.S. Jobs - Post H.S. Options - AP Testing - Preferential
Treatment - Homework - Bathroom
Facilities - Activism - School Supply
Inventory - Alcohol - Differentiation - School Lunches - Drug Abuse - Cell Phones - Economy - Birth Control - School Fines - Registration Fees - Wages - Athletic Budget - Abstinence - Academic
Schedules - Block Scheduling
- Racism - Box Over Porch - Pollution - Homophobia - Standardized
Testing - Sexism - Drop Gate - Solar Panels - Dress Codes - Jobs - ½ Days - Immigration - Athletic Facilities - Learning Styles - Chewing gum - Student
Microwaves - Swimming
Budgets - Air Conditioning
Turf Room - Iraq War - Computer Labs - Low Wage jobs - “Max” Wage Jobs - Study Hall - Public Play
Places - Cliques - Literacy Rates - Variety of Music
Selection During Passing Period
- Longer Passing Periods
110
This is a picture of the completed board as it looked in the classroom during the
identification and investigation phase.
Figure 10. Completed problem board.
Clarified Focus through Surveys and Interviews
Participants were able to clarify their focus and define issues for investigation based on
the information provided from surveys and interviews. Participants were encouraged to
incorporate live sources through interviews and surveys, and several participants
advanced their issue through these live sources. Participants who spoke with live
sources were able to focus their study and were more likely to complete the process all
the way through to an action presented to a live audience.
Working together, Matt, Justin, and James surveyed their peers to identify the
extent of the cheating problem on their high school campus. They surveyed the
111
students of the class. Besides the obvious benefit of having current, live responses to
their research questions, this group also benefited from the activity of creating a survey.
When they created the survey, they narrowed their focus. Their research questions,
though simple, provided a clear focus for their investigation. Their survey questions
included:
1. Have you ever cheated academically?
2. If so, what have you cheated on? - Major Test Grade - Quiz Grade - Homework/Daily Grade
3. Why did you choose to cheat? -Didn’t Study - Don’t Care - Worried About Class Rank -Other: ______________
Morgan’s survey was completed on a chart in the classroom. It simply asked
whether the school should have a study hall period and then asked the participant to
respond to a why question. Though Seth did not conduct a formal survey, his research
summary showed that he spoke with peers about his concern, and he reported their
responses in his paper, stating that some of his friends disliked the songs played during
passing period “They think that the songs are stupid, or ‘retarded’.” He called for a
survey of the participants in the school as part of his solution in his action plan.
Only Brett utilized the opportunity to conduct an interview. Brett reported in his
summative interview with me that his father had warned him that playing on the fields
near his home could result in a fine, and this news had instigated his study. Brett called
the city parks and recreations department to investigate the rules and the fines. Then,
Brett conducted a survey to see whether other participants wanted to play on the fields
that were restricted from public use. His survey included the following two questions:
112
1. Would it benefit you if you got to play on the fields at [Park Name] park?
2. Do you know that if you play on fields that say, “Game Field – no unauthorized practices or games.” You could be fined up to $500?
The responses to Brett’s investigation led him to investigate the different rules for the
different parks and develop a plan for sharing the space, so that the city could have nice
fields for games and practices, and the youth could have a place to play pick-up games.
Like Brett, the participants who utilized live sources clarified their focus for their
research. They clearly identified their problems and, through this investigation, were
able to proceed toward solutions. The way participants worked to solve their problems
will be discussed next.
Solve the Problem Together – Phase 3
The collaborative efforts of the participants of this study extended from the
beginning, when participants were exploring their experiences, to the end, when the
participants acted on their problems. As they worked to solve their problems, they
shared ideas and worked together to collaborate on possible audiences and solutions.
Some participants worked in research teams. Five of the ten participants of this study
worked on group projects. Nathan and Neal worked as a pair on the topic of “Hot Jobs,”
and James, Justin, and Mark worked together toward a solution for student cheating.
These participants worked together and independently because the curriculum required
individual research papers, so these participants were instructed to divide the topic.
Each participant researched a different aspect that would support the overall solution for
113
the problem. As the participants worked, either as a team or individually, to support their
solution with research and create a plan of action, a clear theme emerged: Participants
were supported through models, clear examples of problems and potential solutions.
As the participants progressed through this challenging phase of the process, I
provided a daily warm-up example of research used to attack a problem through media.
These examples included an advertisement from the American Milk Council sharing the
benefits of drinking milk, a Drug Abuse Resistance Education Website that provides free
research for parents, teens, and children on drug abuse, and, my own testimony to the
State Board of Education regarding new state English Language Arts standards and a
subsequent interview that resulted from a press conference after the testimony. These
models were intended to help students visualize their own problems, solutions and
potential audiences for action.
Another model, provided to the participants, was the film Supersize Me
(Spurlock, 2003). Participants spent two days viewing the film and completing an
analysis of how the author used research skills to work toward a solution for an
identified problem. The guide asked the participants to identify the statistics,
methodology, sources, credibility, use of interviews and testimonials, and then asked
the participants to compare the film to their own study. Finally, the participants
responded to the film by answering questions about the audience for the film and the
impact of the film on American culture.
Bethany, who had struggled with her audience for her comparative paper on
marijuana, decided that her audience could be the constituency of Ron Paul and
decided to ask the presidential candidate to post her paper on his Website after seeing
114
the D.A.R.E. example. Brett decided to include both the interview and survey in his
presentation on local parks. At the end of their research summaries, each participant
was required to present a plan of action, explaining how their problem and solution
would be presented to a live audience. The provided models supported the participants
by providing ideas for potential audiences and an understanding of the content needed
to persuade an audience.
The models also provided examples for the use of sources. Participants were
required by the curriculum to find five sources for their research. To encourage
collaboration, I allowed participants to share a single source as a group, and live
sources from interviews and surveys could be included in the five. The models showed
how to use the research to support claims and discover their audience. Though I
encouraged participants to be creative in their possible solutions and audiences for their
problem, many participants found their solutions when they explored the related
literature while they were completing their research requirements.
For example, Mark, Justin and James were exploring student cheating, and
through their survey, they discovered an alarming rate of cheating in their own school.
In their research, they also discovered that teachers rarely enforce cheating rules and
that few schools had specific policies regarding cheating. This group used the examples
of schools that did have policies to make recommendations to the teachers at their own
school. The recommendations included:
- Honor Codes could be enacted
- Individual desks, not table groups (separate students grouped in more than two to a table)
- Have students turn off all electronic devices with them and have them stored in container on the teachers’ desk
115
- Patrol the classroom periodically
- Never take your eyes off the students
- Try to refrain from doing other work while students are testing
- Typed and online assignments should be checked for plagiarism
Brett used his research to discover the number and location of parks in the city and to
determine which fields could be made available to the public. He even received positive
feedback from the person he interviewed who indicated the city was very interested in
knowing what the youth of the city wanted from the parks. Morgan found examples of
schools with study halls and statistics that supported her argument for the class, and
she even developed alternative schedule options to offer during her presentation. And
Noah discovered schools that offered parking incentives, and recorded how the
students earned them and why the schools provided this parking.
Together the students and I were able to work to solve the chosen problems. I
supported the students with multiple and extended models of the use of research in the
real world, and the students were able to support each other by working in groups,
sharing their sources, and responding to surveys of their classmates. When the
students completed their research papers, they were ready to perform their action.
Action – Phase 4
The action phase of problem posing was a totally new experience for the
participants because their previous experiences with school research projects ended
with a paper or presentation to the class. At one point, a participant asked me, “Are we
116
really going to talk to these people?” In the post-project interviews, Seth expressed his
surprise that he was expected to take action on his research.
At first I thought we were just doing it… I thought it was just a normal assignment. This actually was a real research project. I mean, I thought it was just a thing for English class, that’s about it. I thought that… I was actually like ‘Oh, we are actually going out and doing something.’ I didn’t expect that… It was kind of surprising.
In the action phase of problem posing, participants were successful when the following
two things occurred:
(a) A clear focus and purpose was identified early in the problem posing process.
(b) The audience was close in proximity.
Clear Focus Identified Early in the Process
A clear focus and purpose was identified early in the problem posing process.
Data to support this theme were located at the end of the research summaries where
participants were required to write an action plan. All of the participants who correctly
identified their audience completed the action phase of the problem posing process.
117
Table 6
Early Purpose Identified
Student Early Purpose Identified
Seth Request a survey on Blackboard on
passing period music
Noah Interview with school principal about
school parking
Morgan Present the importance of study hall to
school principal
Mark Make a brochure on school cheating
Justin Put a brochure on school cheating in the
teachers’ boxes
James Create new meetings to discuss school
cheating
Seth identified his problem as the lack of diversity in the music during passing
periods. His plan of action was to request “a survey on Blackboard as to what’s their
favorite music.” Noah desired “an interview with Mr. [Hook] who is the principle of our
school… and see what there point of view is and there opinion about the school’s
parking lot….” Morgan hoped that “the principle would consider letting students have
study hall as an after school or in-school class.” Mark planned to “make a brochure…
with information and statistics of school cheating.” Justin, his team mate extended this
by adding that he planned to put “a copy of the brochure in each of the teachers’
118
mailboxes inside the office.” James clarified the goal further saying, “Hopefully, this
brochure will open the eyes of our staff and create new meetings and conferences that
will be held to only discuss cheating.” These participants with clear purpose and a clear
audience at this point of the process completed their action by presenting their research
to the live audience they described.
Audience was Close in Proximity
The audience was close in proximity.
Close proximity with their audience improved the opportunities for participants to
complete their action. Table 7 shows the participant, the audience sought, and whether
participants completed their action plan. Note that some participants only determined
their action plan at the project stage, after the research summaries were completed.
119
Table 7
Participant Plans for Action
Participant Audience Sought Location of
Audience
Action Complete
James High School
Teachers
Front Office (with
permission from
principal)
Yes
Justin High School
Teachers
Front Office (with
permission from
principal)
Yes
Mark High School
Teachers
Front Office (with
permission from
principal)
Yes
Brett City Council or City
Recreation Board
City Offices or
Recreation Office
No
Noah Principal Principal’s Office Yes
Nathan Local Professor &
Students in the
School
Local University No
Neal Local Professor &
Students in the
School
Local University No
Bethany Ron Paul Campaign
Headquarters
(never specifically
identified address)
No
Morgan Principal Principal’s Office Yes
Seth Principal – via letter Principal’s Office Yes
120
By design, the participants began the problem posing process by identifying their
research issues close to home, subsequently resulting in audiences that were also
close to home. Students met with the audiences located within the school, but the
further from the school the audience was located, the less likely students were able to
complete the planned action. Brett’s action, located in the community but away from the
school, was almost completed. Although he made the recreation department aware of
his concerns and discussed the possibility of making the change he desired, he did not
follow through at the end to present his final product formally, even though, Brett
reported, the recreational board expressed interest in knowing what they could do to
meet the needs of the local youths and were interested in his research.
Moreover, all of the participants and all of the projects did complete some action,
represented by a formal class presentation. This activity gave participants an
opportunity to practice their presentation before approaching their live audience, and it
gave the other participants in the class a chance to respond and make
recommendations on each plan. Below is a graph with the proximities of audiences
available to the participants.
121
Figure 11. Audience proximity.
For the most part, the participants in this study chose audiences that were close. Six of
these projects were presented at the school level, and they were all completed.
Bethany’s project had a national audience and was not completed. Nathan and Neal’s
action involved both the national and local community, but it was not completed, and
Brett’s was community and only partially completed.
122
Summary
The work and interviews of the participants revealed several elements supporting
the problem posing process. In regards to student experiences, the students benefited
from the peer journal activity as it allowed them an opportunity to bring forward their
prior knowledge and receive an immediate response from the peers. When the students
worked to identify, investigate and pose problems within their lives, they were best
supported by investigating live sources and collaborating on ideas with their peers. With
the support of models from literature and instructor provided models, the participants
were able to solve the problems and create plans of action. Finally, a clear focus and
purpose, identified early in process and an audience close in proximity supported
student completion of their actions to finish the problem posing process successfully.
Although there were elements that supported problem posing during this class
unit on problem posing, there were also constraints to problem posing. These will be
shared in the next section.
Constraints to Problem Posing
What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project? In response to the second guiding question, the data from this study suggest that
there were several classroom and instructional elements that were constraints to
problem posing. The constraints can be represented as themes that align with the
phases of problem posing. As the students moved through the phases, their needs
changed and the themes of constraint were dependent on the phase of problem posing
where the data were situated. Therefore, this analysis is organized around the problem
123
posing process reviewed in Figure 1. Student quotes are represented as they appeared
in their work without any grammatical or structural changes.
Begin with Students’ Experience – Phase 1
Peer journals were utilized to provide the students with an opportunity to explore
their personal experiences in relation to several issues initiated by my introduction to the
unit. The students responded to the following four issues previously described: cheating
in schools, immigration and the job market, relevance of the school curriculum, and the
idea of waiting for the world to change. Evidence of several constraints was present
during this phase:
(a) Participants included vague identifications instead of specifically naming the people and the problems involved in the issues.
(b) The peer audience impacted the way students framed their ideas. Because of a heightened awareness of their peers, students qualified controversial statements and some students insulted each other.
(c) Limited personal experiences with the topic led to inaccurate information that was shared between group members.
Vague Identifications
Participants included vague identifications instead of specifically naming the
people and the problems involved in the issues. The code of vague identification was
given when a student used nonspecific nouns such as people, students or teachers in
their peer responses. It is likely that students used these vague terms instead of specific
names because they did not want to report bad behavior or make offensive statements
to their peers or to me. This became a constraint because the inability or refusal to
124
identify specifically the issue limited the meaning and the depth of a conversation that
could have included a deliberate exposure of underlying issues.
When Brett responded to cheating with “I think that it is wrong for people to
cheat, but people don’t think it matters if they cheat or not because they think it won’t
matter or change the fact they got a better grade than someone who worked their butt
off,” he is clearly frustrated by a personal experience, but instead of naming the
cheaters, he generalizes the experience using “people” instead of specific names.
Realistically, students are unlikely to own up to or name the cheaters in a journal that
will be read by their peers and me, their teacher, and though students separated
themselves from the cheating prompt, some students included themselves in the
wrongdoing. Morgan was frustrated by the “kids” who cheated to make better grades,
but when she shared, she added, “Sad thing is as much as we hate people cheating off
us, we cheat off other people.” By using the personal pronoun we, she included herself,
making a personal connection. Talking about jobs, Morgan excluded herself when she
stated that “everyone wants money and quick and they don’t want to have to work” and
then later “People need to take responsibility for their own actions and to quit blaming
others for their mistakes and problems.” Here “everyone” could be the students in the
class, but she implies that she does not include herself in this everyone with the use of
the word people here instead of the we she used before when she talked about
cheating.
Seth shared Morgan’s concern about the desire for wealth when he wrote “The
world is revolving around money and people can never get enough of it.” The students
recognize the social problems caused by the desire for wealth, but he relies on people
125
to identify an unknown selfish being, he also generalized to the world to describe the
place where this offense occurs. This could be because he does not want to offend
others, or it could be because Seth does not personally know. Though Nathan included
himself using the word we in the response “If we weren’t so lazy everybody would have
something to do and there wouldn’t be time for people to do drugs and so much trouble
could be avoided,” he returned to the word people when the topic of drugs showed up.
Bethany was additionally vague “…people wouldn’t have time to do some of the wrong
things that they do.” Not only are the people unidentified, the wrong doing is so vague
that it is difficult to connect meaning to her comment. She expects her audience to
understand a cryptic message when she goes on to warn them that they “shouldn’t have
to rely on other people in life because for the most part they will let you down.” This
statement implies that Bethany has been let down by someone she was counting on,
but she does not share the specific experience that makes her believe this statement.
Her reasons may be too personal for this journal.
Certainly the students do not want to offend each other. Mark seemed
additionally concerned about offending his instructor, or breaking an unwritten code of
silence, when he wrote “…some people don’t study and they want to pass so they
cheat. Some teachers use different tests to stop the cheating but some teachers are
lazy and don’t make the separate tests.” It could be risky to call a specific teacher lazy,
and additionally, it is not in Mark’s nature to be disrespectful or unappreciative of the
teachers who work to educate him.
Neal’s vague identification was especially poignant when compared to the
specific description he included when he shared that
126
People who actually study and listen in class look like they didn’t because they might get an 82 on a test. The people who cheat, however, get like 97’s on their tests and now it just isn’t fair to the people who actually did study.
The details here include a situation and specific grades, but still no names are shared.
Even when it seems clear that Neal is talking about the city and his high school, he
doesn’t name them, “For example people throw their trash all over the city, don’t clean
up in the bathroom, and just don’t care about anything.” In both cases people
represents offending parties that Neal would be uncomfortable naming.
Political issues are minimized by generalities. James shares that “Most people
when they think about our economy don’t think about the minimum wage jobs,” and, “If
we didn’t have other people doing the dirty jobs who would do them.” These statements
paired show the oppressor and the oppressed both represented with the word people.
Justin does the same thing by using three peoples that represent both parties. “Many
people are mistreated daily, just because of their color. I think more people should treat
other people the way they want to be treated.”
Though in many of these cases, the identification of the vague terms could be
implied, the fact that the students did not feel safe enough with their peers or their
instructor to name these issues and people specifically represents a constraint to a full
recognition and understanding of their shared experiences. The next section will
connect this to the way the participants framed their responses for their peers as they
interacted with peer pressure.
127
Framing Ideas for Peer Responses
The peer audience impacted the way students framed their ideas. Because of a
heightened awareness of their peers, students qualified controversial statements and
some students insulted each other. The students worked in groups of four during the
peer journal process. As described before, the peer response provided support for
exploring the students’ experiences; however, there were also occasions when the
students’ awareness of their peers impeded full disclosure, and conversely, there were
times that students were hostile toward another group member. These peer obstacles
had some patterns. First, when some students made controversial or political
statements that they were concerned peers might find offensive, they often qualified
their writing with a side remark that would diminish the seriousness of the topic at hand.
The reason for this was apparent when some students responded with hostility to
comments that they did not agree with or comments that they found offensive.
I have observed as a high school teacher that teens can be quite hard on each
other. Near the beginning of this activity, Seth corrected the grammar of one of his
peers: “’their’ not ‘there,’” showing that he could be critical, but when he had a conflict
with a peer on an issue, he said “I kind of disagree with your perspective.” He qualified
his disagreement with the words “I kind of,” minimizing the impact and confrontation with
his peer. Noah on the other hand was straightforward with his disagreement, but his
comment was abrasive when he called Brett “racist” after Brett described advancing
from Taco Bell to Macaroni Grill.
Nathan spoke with the firmest voice but still used a wide range of qualifiers as he
progressed. For example, on the topic of cheating, he wrote “…the only way to make
128
them stop is to bust them and bust them hard. Be mean with punishment, MEAN!!!.” He
followed this comment with the following symbol: “☺.” Then, when he called out his
friend Neal for cheating, he said “I think [Neal] cheats and he is just trying to just look
good. Haha JK [Just Kidding]… and [Neal] really cheats hah wow I am in a bad
mood…” Then to offset his own bad behavior, he recounted a time when he was in
trouble for calling another student “gay.” He shared “…I got ISS [In School Suspension]
for calling someone gay last year, very stupid they said was a lesson, my butt, I just
turned around and called them gay haha hasn’t changed my experiences in life.” Then,
when Nathan insults Bethany he says “And [Bethany] she for sure doesn’t pay attention
in class all she is thinking about is like, guys, [Noah] and stuff like that haha haha JK
[Just Kidding].” Later he tells her “…please [Bethany] shut up.” Then moving to a
seemingly opposite extreme, he claims that he’s “waiting for [Bethany] to call [him]
haha” and “[Bethany] Those are the most truthful words ever spoken ☺.” Then he used
haha and ☺ in combination to off-set this comment: “…Americans should be less lazy
but we really do have someone for every job even if they aren’t real Americans. Haha
☺.” After Bethany commented that “…men need to man up,” Nathan said “…please
[Bethany] shut up… Yeah fool! I have roofed a house before.” Interestingly he ended
this journal entry: “… yeah I love up to [Bethany] she is so smart.” Nathan, Neal and
Bethany seemed to be negotiating the uncomfortable content at the same time they
were negotiating peer relationships. Maintaining social standing in the students’ peer
groups required that students participate in this balance between insulting peers and
dismissing the insults as jokes.
129
Bethany worked to keep Nathan honest in the journal and asked Nathan, “What
did the quote have anything to do with roofing houses,” and, “I am waiting for [Nathan]
to stop writing about himself haha.” Neal added to Nathan’s comments on immigration
with “What? No compriendo This says about America? … but yeah most Americans do
not roof houses, it usually is people of the Mexican decent.” However, Mark really took
the issue of Mexicans roofing houses to task when he told Neal “First off not all people
who ‘roof’ a house is Mexican, but some Americans wouldn’t be mentally strong enough
to build a house but some are.” Nathan’s comments were misguided and needed a
rebuttal, but in the end, Mark lessened the strength of his words with “but some are.”
Neal stereotyped “most Americans” and “Mexicans,” and Mark, one of two Hispanic
students in the class, stepped up to address this without replicating the generalization.
This group, made up of Nathan, Neal, Bethany, and Mark, worked to have a
serious discussion, but because they often insulted each other, they developed a
pattern of release from the intent, using side comments of JK, just kidding, ☺, and haha
to diminish the impact. Unfortunately, these phrases also diminished the strength of
their arguments and the students’ ability to develop ideas cooperatively in a safe
environment free of insults.
The students alternated back and forth between insulting each other and praising
each other. When they needed to say something, they often deflected the focus of their
message with a comment that would release them from the responsibility for what they
had said. The next section will show how students perpetuated misinformation as they
developed their shared personal experiences.
130
Limited Personal Experiences
Limited personal experiences with the topic led to inaccurate information that was
shared between group members. The students reported their personal experiences, but
some of the students did not bring accurate information into the conversation because
of their misconceptions. This difference can be particularly noted among the four
different prompts for the peer response journals found in table 3.
The students had a wide range of personal experiences dealing with school cheating
and most of the personal knowledge shared was based on observations they had made.
However, other prompts were more limiting for the students because the students did
not have related experience, and in several cases, students inadvertently worked with
misinformation provided by a peer.
Few participants made erroneous statements regarding cheating, but one was
made when Brett claimed that when “baseball players got caught with steroids, they just
get kicked out of the MLBaseball league. When we get caught with steroids, we get
thrown in jail” because we know that Barry Bonds was able to continue in the MLB
(Major League Baseball) until he broke the homerun record, even though the MLB knew
he had used steroids (Mitchell, 2007; Quinn, 2007). The only other incorrect piece of
information provided during the responses to this prompt was made by Bethany when
she said, “Everyone gets caught eventually.” Not everyone is caught and punished for
cheating. However, this statement was likely a generalization perhaps used to avoid a
disagreement.
In response to the prompt, “Does this school teach all of the students what they
need to know?” in connection to the Langston Hughes’ poem “Theme for English B,” the
131
students primarily took this opportunity to complain about their classes instead of
looking more deeply at the purpose of school and the curriculum. This question may
have been better phrased, “How does what is taught at this school show you what the
school expects of its graduates?” However, based on the prompt used, several students
made misconceived statements that challenged the development of an accurate and
meaningful textual conversation. Some of these comments included: “like when do I
need to use radicals or when am I ever going to use the periodic table, never.” “Every
single lesson is pointless because we are not going to be needing any of it later in our
lives,” and surprisingly,
I agree with [nonparticipant] about the fact that the team building activities don’t really work. In the teams, friends talk to their own friends and people whoever rarely met never interact. If I don’t know anyone in my group, I can’t wait for the activity to end. The team building activities are not successful in the real world.
These responses are immature in that they lack the experience beyond school to see
where these content areas fit into the world beyond the classroom. However, these
statements may represent truth for these students based on their life experiences.
In response to the immigration topic, most of the inaccuracies were built on
generalizations and stereotypes. They included:
- People come from other countries come to get money for their family at home. (Neal)
- Would you rather beg for money out in the streets, or at least, work at a McDonald’s and get some money? (Noah)
- America used to be a bunch of do’ers now were a bunch of waiters. (Nathan)
- Well it is not normally required for most women to get our hands dirty, normally the mens… (Bethany)
- A lot of the smart jobs are worked by Asians and Indians… they work harder in school. (Morgan)
132
- Americans have other countries do their dirty work for them. Americans can be very lazy, but at the same time, we have never lost a war and neither have we fought a war in our own country. So I think Americans show great patriotism, (Justin) and
- America won’t make their own clothing because everything we wear today says ‘made in China.’ America does all the ‘smart’ jobs. We program things like computers and we design things like video games, but we never make them, we just ship the parts off to their countries and they do the dirty work for us.(Justin)
From a critical pedagogical stance, I would judge that these students needed to
question their own and their peers’ assumptions constructively, but they did not do so.
Critical questioning and providing support for these blanket statements could eliminate
some the mistakes. However, this activity was designed to bring forward the students’
experiences and to help them engage in conversations about critical issues before
engaging in their own research. These mistakes and generalizations were a constraint
to meeting that goal because misinformation was not challenged, and students
accepted what they heard and built on it in their own writing.
Part of the purpose of grounding this activity in literature was to provide good
background knowledge for the students to build their responses. But as already
established with the cheating prompt, there are topics about which some students have
more experience than others. Though misinformation is a constraint to the problem
posing process, the information shared by the students was still a representation of their
experiences.
The next section of this chapter will explore a constraint to identifying,
investigating and posing a problem from within the participants’ lives.
133
Identify, Investigate, Pose a Problem within Your Life – Phase 2
At this phase of the problem posing process, participants engaged in several
instructor-led activities to explore potential topics. The peer journals, as described in
relation to experience, provided a foundation for the participants to build their own
problems and gave participants an opportunity to interact with the issues provided by
me before they explored their own. Moreover, at this point in the process participants
needed both to identify and start their investigations. They were provided an opportunity
for a walk about around the school with their peers to make a list of problems in and
around the school that could be potential topics for their research and action. After the
walk about, the participants came back and brainstormed a list of potential topics and
were instructed to continue their search at home and in the community. The class
continued to add to the problem board for several days. From the problem board,
participants chose their topics and began checking for resources to support their study.
If the goal of problem posing was for students to investigate, identify, and pose a
problem within their own lives, apparently the choices of two of the groups (cheating
and jobs), to pursue investigations into previously explored topics, was an unintentional
endorsement of several issues. The students chose topics that were developed by the
class and were interesting, but could have posed constraints to problem posing
because they originated from me, so the theme emerged: Although the participants
identified topics from their own lives, many students still chose topics that were
proposed by the me.
134
The development of this theme is revealed when the student generated list of
topics is compared to those actually used by the students. Table 6 contains the list that
the participants generated on the class problem board.
Table 8 contains the list of topics that the participants chose.
Table 8
Participant Topic Choices
Participant Topic Chosen
Bethany Marijuana
Brett Park Availability
James Cheating in Schools – Group
Justin Cheating in Schools – Group
Mark Cheating in Schools – Group
Morgan Study Hall
Nathan Hot Jobs – Group
Neal Hot Jobs – Group
Noah Parking Incentives
Seth Music During Passing Periods
Two groups, representing fifty percent of the participants, chose “cheating in schools”
and “hot jobs” as their topics. Both of these topics can be directly traced back to topics
that were given in the peer journal activity. The “cheating in schools” topic was first
explored based on Demi’s book The Empty Pot, and the “Hot Jobs” topic was first
135
explored through Alice Childress’ short story, “Mrs. James.” The discussion that
followed this work connected to immigration.
The first group that chose “cheating in schools” initially picked “school bathroom
facilities” as their topic, but after their initial exploration of sources, they changed topics
to “cheating in schools.” Students were encouraged to look for sources before
committing to their topic. Also the students were given a week to add topics to the
problem board, but once the week was over, the students were obligated to choose only
from the board of topics. This group may have felt limited and fallen back on the safe
topic of school cheating which was not a student generated topic because school
cheating was added to the problem board on the first day when the groups looked for
possible topics in their peer journals.
This constraint could be a “casualty” of the very successful peer journal activity.
The participants were engaged by this topic and wanted to pursue it further. However,
with 50% of the participants returning to the prompts provided by me instead of
choosing issues of self discovery on the student produced list, this should be
considered as a possible constraint at this phase of the problem posing process. The
next section will explore the constraints to solving the problem together.
Solve the Problem Together – Phase 3
As described earlier in the chapter, the collaborative efforts of the participants in
this study extended from the beginning, when students were exploring their
experiences, to the end, when the students acted on their problems. As they worked to
solve their problems, they shared ideas and worked together to share resources. Some
136
participants worked in research teams. Five of the ten participants worked on group
projects. Nathan and Neal worked as a pair on the topic of Hot Jobs, and James, Justin,
and Mark worked together toward a solution for student cheating. The participants
worked together and independently because the curriculum required individual research
papers so these participants were instructed to divide the topic. Each participant
researched a different aspect that would support the overall solution for the problem. As
the participants worked to support their solutions with research and to create a plan of
action, a constraint to success emerged: The curriculum requirement of an individual
research paper was a constraint to students solving the problem together.
The students were encouraged to work together to share sources and to talk out
their research and solutions in teams. Time in class was provided for them to share
before they wrote the research reports. For the groups that created a unique singular
product, this worked well, but for students who pursued individual solutions to their
proposed problems, the collaboration sometimes caused awkward connections or
inaccurate claims in the actual research paper as shown below.
Noah tried to connect his research on parking incentives to the research
collected by two nonparticipants who were working on the topics of school naps and
athletic budgets. He attempted to connect with his peers when he wrote:
With the research that I have from the people in the group that I’m in say that napping can be an incentive. Or some people say that, if you perform your best during the athletic time. For your incentive that you have, the department can get a lot of athletic budget.
Still other students who were working individually did not have enough research to
support their writing without the shared resources of a team. Seth and Bethany relied
137
heavily on personal knowledge to complete their papers and often used broad
generalizations to support their arguments. Seth’s paper started off with support, but
once he completed the numbers of quotes and paraphrases required in the grading
rubric, he relied on his personal experiences with the music in the school and his
friends’ general comments, remembered as hearsay, on the selections.
Some people might think that this research is pointless, but, I do not think so. I think that we should change the music, as I said before; it becomes very boring, and makes some of the students that I had surveyed, like different types of music instead of the songs being played on the loudspeakers. But I do admit, some of the kids do like the songs being played over the loudspeakers during the passing periods at school.
Morgan, too, relied on her personal experiences to support her position in her paper
with limited references from research.
If there was an after school study hall program, then kids could attend if they didn’t understand something that was taught in class, also if there was an after school (kids out of trouble). So my overall point is that, if kids had study hall before or after school, then a majority of the students attending would raise their grades because their doing their homework, they would also do well in class because they asked questions during the tutorial sessions and they would have more time to do what they want to do.
Though Bethany’s paper on marijuana was well supported with substantial research
both for and against the legalization of marijuana as I requested, she chose to make a
personal connection in her introduction, claiming “an uncle dealing with chemotherapy.”
This claim turned out to be creative support when she later admitted that she did not
have such an uncle.
Of the five students who worked in teams on group projects, overreliance on
personal knowledge was not a problem. The students working in teams clearly and
effectively wove into their essays strong support for their positions. So, the constraint in
138
this case was a consequence of pursuing a topic of choice independently without the
community of the class.
In the next section, the constraints to completing action will be presented.
Action – Phase 4
The action phase of problem posing began at the end of the research papers,
when the students were required to create a plan of action and to choose an authentic
audience for solving the problem they had identified and researched. Then, the students
were expected to complete their action plans. In this phase of problem posing, four
constraints were revealed through data analysis:
(a) For some students a clear focus and purpose was not identified early in the problem posing process.
(b) If students receive a low grade on an early assignment, they were reluctant to follow through on their action.
(c) A student struggled to complete the action phase if the audience was far in proximity.
(d) In peer groups, loyalty to a friend prevented a student from completing the action.
Focus and Purpose Not Identified
For some students a clear focus and purpose were not identified early in the
problem posing process. Finding a focus early in the problem posing process supported
a successful action stage. Consequently, those students who were slow to identify a
clear focus struggled to complete their action. To guide the students as they developed
their essays, they were provided guiding questions. What?, So what?, Now what? were
the primary questions, and each of these was broken down into additional questions to
help students understand expectations.
139
Table 9
What? So What? Now What? and Sub Questions
What? What is the problem being investigated?
How did you identify the problem?
So What? Why is it important to study this topic?
What did the research tell you about your
topic?
Now What? What can you do to work toward solving
this problem?
What is your action plan?
Who is the audience for this solution?
The four students who did not complete their actions all lacked a clear Now
what?. Their plans were vague, or they did not have a plan. For example, although
Brett’s research had put him in personal contact with the head of the city recreational
department, he did not identify that contact as the target audience for his action.
Instead, he wrote, “I am going to personally confront the City Council of [City Name] or
the Parks and Recreation department and ask if this could be done or anything could be
done.” The use of the word or indicates a lack of assurance in his plan and his
audience.
As described previously, Bethany’s marijuana project was not structured for
problem posing, since she was exploring both the advantages and disadvantages of
legalizing marijuana at my request. However, in her attempt to meet the expectations,
Bethany shared,
140
I believe this to be an either or situation. Maybe once people read this article on marijuana they will become educated, and that is all that is wanted, so that they don’t make that final decision on just from what you have heard or by the society is incorrect.
When we worked on presentations, Bethany verbally explained that it was her goal to
send her essay to Ron Paul, candidate for president of the United States, to post on his
Website. However, after multiple offers to help her prepare and send her paper, she did
not follow through on the action and send her essay to Ron Paul. Bethany did not have
a clear plan to reach her audience, and she did not complete her action phase.
As a group, Nathan and Neal also failed to complete their action, and their
audience was vaguely identified in their papers. Nathan wrote,
I would like to try and find a head hunter organization that would listen to me. When I do find one I want to partner up with them and see if I could help them searching out to find people that are in high school and have them help those kids decide a career path that would fit them and be a benefiting job.
Waiting to find this organization at the end of the problem posing process contributed to
his inability to complete his action. Neal’s paper was similar.
I have decided to do that by writing a letter to a company or business asking them certain things about jobs and what it takes to obtain a decent one. I’m not quite sure which business I am going to choose to write too, but I am leaning towards my mothers, which is the American Heart Association.
In the end, neither student identified the audience he eventually chose to approach, a
local college professor who had written a recent article on the job market. Neal
mentioned the American Heart Association, but working for a non-profit organization
was not identified as a “hot job” in Nathan or Neal’s papers.
Bad Grades
If a student received a low grade on an early assignment, they were reluctant to
141
follow through on their action. Two of the students revealed a second reason for not
completing their action in their journal reflections at the end of the problem posing unit.
In addition to providing the students an opportunity to reflect, these journals were also
used as a member check. The students reflected on what they had done in the problem
posing process, and then I responded by explaining what I had observed in their work. I
then asked the students to respond to my observations.
Clearly, Neal’s grade discouraged him from presenting his research to an
audience because he wrote:
About doing it on my own, I’m not that convinced that I could because seeing as how I tried and thought I did decent on that paper, but got a 67 on it, In my opinion I don’t really think this is my strong suit.
This comment indicates he would have put forth more effort to contact his audience if he
thought he had a quality product to share. Bethany, whose project structure already
made it difficult to complete an action, was also discouraged by her grade. She
explained “I’m very disappointed on how bad I did, as in a grade yet I tried so hard.”
In reality, both students had good points to share from their research papers.
However, for the research paper, there were additional requirements for correct MLA
style and correct documentation. These skills are important, but in this case, they were
a constraint for students in the problem posing process because they led to low grades.
Proximity
A student struggled to complete the action phase if the audience was not in close
142
proximity. The last constraint was proximity. The closer the student was to the physical
location of the audience, the more likely they were to complete their action. Table 8
shows the participants and their audiences.
The students who did complete their action plans worked with an audience on
campus, and the students who did not complete their action plans were working with
audiences beyond the campus. Patterns revealed in data analysis suggest that
audiences that were on campus were concrete and real to the students, so it made the
process easier to imagine and finish. Students looking beyond the school were targeting
an unfamiliar audience, an audience beyond their own experiences. The more distant
the audience was from the school, the less likely it was for the students to identify them
during the process and to approach these audiences to complete their actions. See
figure 12.
Figure 14 illustrates that, Brett, who only partially completed his action during his
interviews, found his audience in the outer rings. His audience was at the community
level. Nathan and Neil chose audiences between the community and the national level.
They had identified their audience as the author of a journal article, but he happened to
be located in the extended community. Bethany’s audience was a national audience
because she sought the assistance of a presidential candidate to publish her essay.
Loyalty to a Friend
In peer groups, loyalty to a friend prevented a student from completing the action.
For the group made up of Nathan and Neal, their friendship became a constraint
in completing their action when Nathan relied on Neal to send the email to their
143
audience. Though Neal was asked multiple times to provide the evidence that he
reached his audience, he did not provided the evidence. When he was first questioned
about the email that he sent, Neal responded that he sent it from home, so I asked him
to pull up his sent mail and forward a copy to me. I also, sent him several email
reminders. When the students reflected, Neal said again that he would get that to me. In
the member-check, I asked Nathan if the email was sent, and his response was that
“you will have to ask Mr. [Neal], every time I ask him he gets mad,” Though Nathan and
Neal are best friends, they are still negotiating their relationship. Nathan asked Neal
about the email, but to preserve his friendship, he would not proceed any further toward
completing the group’s action.
Summary
Several constraints influenced the success of students participating in the
problem posing process. At the beginning, when the students relied only on their
previous life experiences, they often lacked relevant examples or provided mistaken
information when they shared together. Also, because the students were working
together, they struggled to name specifically some problems in this social context,
sometimes relying on vague descriptions or offsetting controversial comments. A
possible constraint to identifying, investigating, and posing a problem was that half of
the students ultimately chose a topic that was first introduced by the instructor instead of
using germane topics initiated from their own lives. An additional constraint to this
problem posing process occurred because of a mandate in the curriculum that all
students must write an individual research paper. Although some students still worked
144
together to solve their posed problem, many students left the group to work individually
on their topic and did not receive the support of shared resources and insights. Finally,
students failed to complete the action component of their project when they did not
clearly identify a focus and purpose early in the process, when they received a bad
grade on an early assignment in the unit, and when the audience was located off
campus.
The Facilitated Research Experience
What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
The data from the study suggest that the critical problem posing process
facilitated the students’ individual development during the English class research
assignment. This section is organized in individual student vignettes similar to those
used at the beginning of the chapter to introduce the participants. Looking at the
students individually may reveal their development by comparing their writing in the
early stages of the problem posing process to their later writing and interviews
conducted at the end of the process. Student quotes are represented as they appeared
in their work without any grammatical or structural changes.
Mark
At the beginning of the process, Mark worked in his peer journal with Nick,
Nathan, and Bethany. He often started with a general comment, but when his peers
made statements with which he disagreed, he would become more assertive and speak
145
out. For example, on the topic of jobs, Mark chose to respond to the literature instead of
the prompt. He started with a general topic about a character in the story that spoke in
the third person, and wrote that “People who talk in the third person about themselves
are usually jerks because they’re all into themselves.” However, he engaged deeper in
response to Neal who said that Mexicans roof houses. Mark wrote, “First off not all
people who ‘roof’ a house is Mexican, but some Americans wouldn’t be mentally strong
enough to build a house.” This showed how Mark initially avoided confrontation with his
peers, but he was still willing to stand up to his peers when they made generalizations.
After completing his research, Mark wrote a research report with an urgent tone
expressing the need for students, teachers and administrators to address the cheating
problem in today’s schools. He ended his research report with “Cheating needs to and
can be stopped with the help of teachers, staff and most importantly students.” In his
reflection, Mark shared how working collaboratively helped him complete his project.
My research skills helped by giving stats and tips to help the audience realize what was going down. My work made a difference because every little bit helped our project. Working in a group helped our presentation because I knew I wasn’t all by myself.
In the final interviews, Mark was optimistic about the success of the completed
project. He expressed that the teachers would “make honor codes,… separate form
tests,…and they can watch more carefully the students.” Mark eventually folded and
distributed the brochures to the teachers after the group obtained permission from the
assistant principal.
Mark’s growth during the problem posing process was enhanced because of his
peer interactions in both the peer journals and the group project. In addition, he
benefited from the immediate audience of the peer journals and the real audience of the
146
school administration and teachers. He was motivated to remind me to make the
copies, so he could complete the final action even when his peers were not available to
help him.
Justin
Justin began this project as an insightful student. With each piece of literature
and prompt, Justin offered well reasoned answers and responses to his peers. A few
examples of some of Justin’s responses in the peer journals illustrate his ability.
Teachers don’t try to prevent cheating and this makes it hard for student to succeed in the long run. When students get out of high school and into college, they won’t know how to do things on their own because they have been cheating their whole lives. I also think that participating in the team building activities provides its own lesson. If you don’t learn to interact with the people in your group, then how are you going to interact with the people in your job, who you have never seen before, who may be from different states, not just different middle schools. I think that the equality of people in this nation differs from person to person. I think that some things that cause this could be the person’s occupation, their salary, the race, and maybe where the person lives Immigrants do most of the toughest, nasty, jobs that Americans won’t do. Immigrants almost makes up the backbone of the manual labor in America. We shouldn’t just go out and blow someone up for not helping us in our own war. That would just make everyone sure that Americans are horrible people.
Like Mark, Justin’s research clearly showed the growth of the cheating problem in the
school and nation, but unlike his peer, Justin knew that there was not a simple fix for the
problem. He recognized that several changes needed to be made, and that it would
take time eliminate the problem. He wrote,
147
More than just the honor codes alone must be used to stop the cheating because just one attempt to stop cheating will never work. You must use several attempts over time. Cheating will not just go away over night. You must widdle away at it until it finally becomes a minor annoyance.
Justin’s research report expressed distain, but patience to work on a systemic solution.
When Justin reflected on his action, he was critical of the group’s presentation to
Mr. Gomez.
I felt nervous when I found out that I had to present to Mr. [Gomez] instead of Mr. [Hook]. I think that Mr. [Gomez] is not as friendly as Mr. [Hook] nor is he as open to new ideas. I believe an interview with Mr. [Hook] would have been more friendlier and he would have engaged in our presentation more. I also think that he would have been able to build onto our ideas too.
Justin held a higher expectation of the presentation, and he felt rejection as the principal
took another appointment and passed off their presentation to the assistant principal.
However, he thought the group was able to make their case to Mr. Gomez because “…
He was kind of shocked about it… he was kind of questionable about this, … and
toward the end I think he supported our idea…” Justin’s progression was subtle, but the
problem posing process moved him from insightful comments to ongoing action. Justin
planned to follow through with his action plan to see that it was implemented. In
response to my question about his project being completed, Justin said, “If there needs
to be like a student-teacher meeting, then I guess we could arrange that.” In addition to
seeing the inequalities of his environment, Justin now feels equipped and motivated to
work towards a change.
148
James
Though James points out that “People are always waiting for other people to go
out and change the world… so they don’t take the initiative to make an impact,” James’
responses show that at the beginning of the problem posing process he does not
believe his work can make a change. For example, on the subject of cheating, James
wrote,
Cheating is a serious problem at our school Not only do people copy each other’s homework; they also cheat on tests. I have heard stories where the teacher has turned around and students start exchanging answers. Just last week students in an AP history class had to retake a test since they cheated when a sub was there. After 1st period, answers to tests fly around and people look up answers to the question that there friends couldn’t figure out. Cheating is nearly impossible to stop, even if there are different test forms.
James gives a clear description of his observations. However, he discounts the
possibility for change. In fact, based on this next entry, he does not choose to engage
unfamiliar people. “I agree with [nonparticipant] about the fact that the team building
activities don’t really work. In the teams, friends talk to their own friends…[and] never
interact. If I don’t know anyone in my group, I can’t wait for the activity to end,” he wrote.
James explains the way things are without a desire to engage or improve on society
because as he explains, “Treating people differently is human nature.”
After James completed his research with his group, the first paragraph of his
research report provided another description of the “cheating epidemic,” but this time,
he followed the description with a specific action needed to eliminate cheating. He
wrote,
Something must be done to eliminate this epidemic sweeping through schools across the nation. Principals and school leaders must advise their staff about cheating. Teachers should be informed about new cheating techniques and the
149
preventative measures. It should then be the job of teachers to apply this knowledge.
At the end of the report, James wrote his plan of action that included a “comprehensive
brochure” for teachers. He believed that teachers were on the “front line” in the defense
against cheating, and that they could make the changes that could curb cheating at the
high school. At this point, James showed that he did not just accept the problem, he
wanted to address it. This is a clear change from his initial entries. In James’ reflection
he said that he “would follow this plan to deal with another issue [he] cared about.”
Noah
Though Noah struggles academically, he values education and is counting on a
good education to bring him the future he has planned. He wondered, “Why would [a
student] cheat threw [his] whole school career while [he] can study and learn?” He
believes that his work today will lead to success tomorrow, and that if he works really
hard he will “become the next Bill Gates.” He wrote to his peers that they should “know
that studying means that you are [going] to have a good life.”
In his research report, Noah struggled. He turned in a report that was difficult to
read and incomplete. His research told him that “most of the students are getting prizes
for their grades.” So he proposed that he would go to the principal and his secretary to
talk about bringing parking incentives to our school. He also thought it might be a good
idea to get some student input.
Before Noah could present his project to Mr. Gomez, I helped Noah by having
him answer a few questions to narrow his focus. He answered these questions:
1. Who will get the parking incentives?
150
2. Where are the parking places in the lot?
3. Why should the school do this?
It was clear after his presentation that he needed direction, and we practiced together.
When Noah presented to Mr. Gomez, he was asking for two specific parking spots to be
used in a rotation for students in the National Honor Society. When Mr. Gomez asked
why the National Honor Society students should get these spots, Noah replied,
Because in the National Honor Society, these, you know, these students obviously they’re… they have good grades and they are doing really good in school. Their GPA is high. They’re… they’ve passed TAKS every single year. They’re the… They’re the smartest students in our school and with them you know, having some kind of prize or, um, or like a present from y’all. I think they should deserve something like this.
Though not well articulated, notably the tape recording of his presentation picked up the
sound of someone typing on a keyboard, and with only two people (Noah and the
assistant principal) present in the office, apparently Noah was presenting to an only
partially interested audience.
In our final interview, Noah was still excited about his plan. When asked if he was
finished with this project, he replied, ”Right now, I’m just waiting for a really good
response from the AP to see what their plan is going to be, and if I see it’s not going
really well, I will go back and do some more research, or to prove my research.”
Because Noah values hard work, he connected evidence in the form of research to
making requests of the administration.
Noah’s academic growth from this process is clear. Though his research report
was incomplete, he included his goal and the research from the sources to support his
ideas. In addition, Noah is eager to continue working on his action with his audience.
The work is graded, but he has moved beyond working for a grade.
151
Seth
At the beginning of the process, Seth seemed to be aware that there is a bigger
point to the work at school than just getting good grades. He had a goal. He shared it in
response to the question What are you waiting for? “I’m waiting to graduate from school,
pass out of college, get a good job, and when I get enough times’ money I’ll make a
movie,” he wrote. Then he asked his peers, “Do you want people to remember you in a
bad way, or a good way?” showing that he understands that the work of our lives can be
measured.
Seth completed his research report on the music selection played over the
intercom system during the passing periods. At this high school, music is played to
facilitate the students’ transition to their next class. When the bell rings for dismissal, the
music starts. One minute before the tardy bell rings for the next class, the music stops,
so the students know they need to hurry so as not to be late. Seth did not like “the
blend” music that was played and thought the school should put up “a survey on
‘Blackboard’ as to what [the students’] favorite music is and [the administration] should
play the most popular music in school.” When Seth got an opportunity to have a voice,
he chose to share it with his peers by allowing students an opportunity to have a vote
for the music played.
Seth completed his research action by mailing a letter to Mr. Gomez requesting a
Blackboard survey, so the students could choose the music for passing periods. When I
asked Seth in his interview what music he would choose, he replied that he “would put
the station 104.9, It’s the Baliwood music station.” Only when I asked at the end, did he
152
reveal his own choice. His work on this project was not for just his choice, but the choice
of all of the students in the school. Most of Seth’s work was done individually. He sought
his own sources for the research project and wrote an individual research report. This is
probably why he chose to send a letter instead of presenting his action to the
administration. Seth only participated in the collaboration in the peer journal activity and
when he presented to the class. However, he benefitted from a real audience. His
concrete audience was the administrator to whom he sent his letter, but he had an
additional abstract audience of the student body that would have participated in the
school-wide survey and heard the change in the music during the passing periods.
Brett
Brett was observant and noticed at the beginning of the problem posing process
that things were not fair in this world. In response to the prompt on student cheating,
Brett wrote, “I think that it is wrong for people to cheat but people don’t think it matters if
they cheat or not because they think it wont matter or change the fact they got a better
grade than someone who worked their butt off.” He was also aware that society is not
fair. In response to “Theme from English B,” Brett wrote, “I think that the story. Theme
For English B, is a good story about ‘not the same freedom’ We all have different
standards in life because we all come from different backgrounds… Not everybody is
treated the same.”
In his research report, Brett shared the reasons it was important to have parks
available in the community. They include: the increase of property values, the health of
the youth in the community, the environmental advantages, and the pride of the
153
American park system. In his research, he conducted a survey at the school to check
the citizen awareness of a specific city park ordinance that fined unauthorized persons
caught playing on the game fields. He also conducted an interview with the city parks
and recreation manager to find out what fields were available to the public. This
interview resulted in a positive response from the official, and though he was anxious to
get a final product, Brett did not complete his action project. Brett’s goal was to ask that
one of several parks “be open to the public and for teams to practice.”
At the time of the reflection, Brett still planned to “set up a appointment today
because today is first day with little homework.” In the interview, Brett responded that
this experience “Helped [me] see what can we can do better in the community. Because
I’m in student council so I really don’t look past the school.” At the time that these
projects were being completed, Brett was participating both in soccer and cross country.
He shared that he wanted to complete the action, but that he could not fit it into his
schedule. However, he felt good about the contact that he had already made with the
city, and he believed the city was receptive and willing to hear and respond to his
concerns.
Brett benefited from working in the problem posing process. He was already
active in the student council work and had previous experience working to make
changes at the school, but this process was different for him. When he made his
requests for this project, he needed to have the support of research and in his case a
survey to make his argument for change. Brett too worked alone at the end of his
project. Had he worked in a collaborative group, the completion of the final action could
have been shared instead of his shouldering the burden of trying to do one more thing
154
in his very busy schedule. However, Brett did realize that his audience was eager to talk
to him, and that until he had called, they did not realize a problem existed. Brett shared
with me that they seemed eager to receive feedback from citizens and to work with
community members.
Bethany
As explained previously in this chapter, Bethany struggled with her work on the
research paper. She changed topics from study hall with Morgan to marijuana, and I
asked her to write a comparative paper instead of following the problem posing process
to assure her completion of the project.
At the beginning of the problem posing process, Bethany shared that “cheating
does happen, you just have to be good at it not to get caught,” but she also recognized
the negative impact of cheating when she added, “Cheating changes test grades, which
can make there no curve for the people who studied which is a bummer.” In response to
the jobs that Americans will not do, Bethany asked, “Why do a job when you can have
someone do it for you?” and then “That is how many make a living in America doing
something for someone else.” Though Bethany was working on an assignment that did
not fit into the problem posing process, she worked individually to complete a successful
research report according to my specifications that she needed to balance the two sides
of her issue.
Her research report gave both sides of the marijuana issue. She started with the
advantages of legalizing marijuana and ended with the disadvantages. In her reflection,
155
Bethany shared that she regretted her topic decision and was disappointed in her
grade.
Its just that it is such a big controversy, and if I could redo I would not do it again, one because I can [tell] you have a biast opinion on it, and it just a hard subject fitting so much valuable information in to a small research paper. I’m very disappointed on how bad I did, as in a grade yet I tried so hard.
Bethany did try hard, and when I interviewed her, I asked her if she thought she could
change people’s opinion of marijuana. She answered, “I’m not going to be able to
change it. I’m just a kid.”
Bethany’s growth was limited. Not only did she come away from this experience
with a sense that she did not have a voice in society, she also failed to meet the
academic standards of the assignment that led to her poor grade. Though she was able
to find resources and weave them successfully into an engaging research report, she
did not provide the internal citations for her sources. This was a major curricular goal for
this assignment. Had she had worked collaboratively with a group, she would have had
more support during the writing process, and she would have had a better product that
she would have felt confident sharing. However, I offered to sit with her to edit the piece
and make the corrections necessary to send it to her audience, but she believed she
was finished with the assignment and did not want to work on it.
Neal
Neal’s academic interactions consisted of his completion of all of his assignments
on time. As previously mentioned, Neal and Nathan are very good friends, and their
passion is sports. Neal is an outstanding athlete, but struggles to find meaning in his
academic pursuits. “We don’t care about anything we learn about so we all just blow it
156
off and don’t care or anything. If it were subjects we cared about, then we could all
relate what we learn to our own life experience.” Neal needed a connection to care
about his work. If he understood the purpose of his assignment, his performance would
improve. In sports the purpose is clear, practice today for the game tomorrow.
Neal grew through his interaction with his partner Nathan. The two completed a
thorough search of the jobs that will be in high demand in the future, and they came up
with good recommendations. In the event that he “doesn’t make it to the NBA,” Nick
found that there was a demand for “electrical jobs.” Though his research report was well
researched, Neal, as Bethany, did not use internal citations in his paper, and he
received a failing grade for this assignment. He did not mention that this was a problem
in the final interview. He told me that he had sent an email to his audience requesting a
presentation at the school, but he never provided the email as evidence to me.
However, when he wrote his reflection, he revealed a concern. When I read his
reflection, I realized the impact of the failing grade on his action. He wrote, “I’m not that
convinced that I could [change things] because seeing as how I tried and thought I did
decent on that paper, but got a 67 on it, In my opinion I don’t really think this is my
strong suit.” Though Neal told me that he sent the email request to his audience, I don’t
believe the action was completed on this project.
Neal’s growth, as Bethany’s, was hindered by the grade he received on his
research report. However, Neal still benefited from collaboration with Nathan and had a
product that was ready for his audience. Even when I offered him a way out of his lie by
telling him that he could send the email again, Neal did not follow through. He not only
157
prevented his own success, he also impacted Nathan’s work since they were working
together.
Nathan
Best friends with Neal, Nathan is the most confident of the two. Nathan was the
only participant to recognize the power of change within himself at the beginning of the
problem posing sequence.
Me waiting for something NO, I am not waiting I am changing. I am trying to be the one who takes action in to my own hands. Other people wait for me. I change the world. ..America used to be a bunch of doers now were a bunch of waiters, always letting people choose our paths and like now we always sit and wait for our friends to pick something to do, God just pick something and go with it.
In his research report, Nathan determined that the best course of action for the job topic
was to have a “head hunter… to partner up with people in the high school [to]… help
kids decide a career path.” Neal wrote the letter to the guest speaker, and Nathan wrote
a letter to the principal. The letter to the principal was intended to facilitate making the
arrangements for the guest to come to the school. Because Neal did not mail his letter,
Nathan’s was not used either. Nathan, as did I, knew that Neal did not send it off, but he
was reluctant to confront his friend. Instead he chose to leave his action incomplete.
Contrary to what Nathan wrote at the beginning, he did wait for Neal, and when Neal did
not follow through, he let it drop.
This collaborative partnership was productive for collecting research for the
project and writing the letters for the action, but in the end, their friendship prevented
Nathan from standing up to Neal when he did not follow through on the action phase.
158
Morgan
At the beginning of the process, Morgan complained about the work at school as
“useless crap” that is learned for “8 mo then once 3 months of summer [come]…
knowledge will get thrown away by the average teen.” Instead Morgan wanted her
school experience to be purposeful. She wished that “school would focus more on trying
to help staving children or donate money for kids who cant afford treatment for cancer.”
Morgan was actively engaged in this lesson, and she took on a topic that was important
to her, the need for study hall. For Morgan, school does not come easy, but she works
hard to do well, and she is often in a race against the clock to get everything done for
her classes.
For her research project, Morgan found several examples of schools that offered
a range of study hall options and the positive results of study hall implementation. In
addition, she surveyed students at the school to see if there was interest. For her action,
she proposed adding a study hall to next year’s schedule to the principal. Instead she
presented to the assistant principal who was interested in her proposal but questioned
the logistics in a seven period day, especially with the new four by four requirements
from the state. Morgan was ready with alternatives. As she offered to Mr. Gomez, “study
hall can also be an after school thing.” Fortunately, she had been part of a successful
program in middle school that had helped her pass the TAKS tests, and she wanted to
bring this program to the high school. This was very likely the positive experience that
Morgan wanted to replicate.
In her interview, Morgan shared that she wants to continue pursuing her issue.
She reported that she was,
159
Just happy that [she] could work on something that meant something to her [her] because [she really would like to have study hall in this school and it was a help because [she] was thinking maybe if [she] worked on this hard enough maybe [she] can really get this to happen.
Morgan grew from wishing that the school would do something meaningful in her
classes to taking the initiative herself. As do her peers, she now knows how to gather
information and support for an argument to make changes in her environment. Indeed
the problem posing process was an answer to her wishes expressed in the early entry
of her peer journal.
Summary
The critical problem posing process provided a framework for the English class
research experience as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students. Although
not all of the students experienced measurable growth in their critical awareness and
desire to act on societal issues, every student did show that they had learned. This can
be attributed to the careful instructional plan that included opportunities to collaborate
with peers, the use of clear models of successful research projects, and the projected
plan of publication to a real audience.
The problem posing process facilitated not only the academic demands of this
project, but it also supported the critical growth of the students. Each student defended
their own views and challenged the writings of their peers in the peer journals during the
early stages of the process. The engagement dropped off for Bethany when she was
asked to change her persuasive focus to a comparative focus, and then failure to grow
occurred after grades were distributed for the research reports. Bethany’s and Neal’s
160
growth appeared to be halted by their grades, and ultimately, Nathan’s development
was cut short because of his collaborative ties with Neal.
The purpose of Chapter 4 was to analyze the data collected in the problem
posing process. The participants were introduced with vignettes that utilized their own
words and descriptions based on in-class observations. This was followed by a specific
discussion that described the supports and constraints to the problem posing process in
response to the first two study questions. The chapter ended with a return to the
individual students to measure the growth in the narrative process as an answer to the
third study question. The use of the students’ writings, artifacts, and interviews were
combined to create triangulation of the data in the reported findings. The next chapter
will be dedicated to drawing conclusions and making recommendations based on the
findings of this study.
161
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter reviews the rationale for the study and summarizes the findings as
organized by the three research questions. The chapter begins with the rationale for the
study, followed by the summary of findings, a conclusions section, and the
recommendations.
Rationale for the Study
The rationale for undertaking this study was to provide a description of a
classroom practice in which the problem posing process was used as part of an English
research assignment in a secondary setting. The problem posing process as described
by Freire (1970) encourages students to “come to see the world not as a static reality,
but as a reality in progress, in transformation” (p. 83). This process enables students to
have transformative experiences as a result of recognizing the world as dynamic
instead of static, and it offers them opportunities to engage authentically with a real
audience.
For this study an instructional plan was developed that used Wink’s (1997) four
phases of problem posing with the explicit goal of allowing students to recognize and
work on problems “in the world and with the world” (Freire, 1970, p. 81). This goal
allowed a natural address of the problems in the students’ context, with the authentic
complexity and chaos found in real problems. Because of these complexities, one
problem leads to the next, and students find themselves committed to working through
the problems (Freire, 1970).
162
This study’s theoretical base is set in critical literacy. Through literacies we come
to understand our world, and through critical literacy, students and teachers interact with
the world, naming and reflecting on what they know and what they see. This approach
fosters student understanding of the construction of power. So literacy, in a traditional
sense, is reading the word or decoding, but critical literacy invites the reader to read the
world and learn to understand the messages found in social, cultural, political and
historical contexts (Wink, 1997). Knobel (2007) identified critical literacy as a distinct
theoretical and pedagogical field focused on “identifying authentic social problems and
ways of addressing these problems through language and action” (p. vii).
Through reflective and cooperative learning experiences, students and teachers
extend their learning from the classroom to the world by engaging and transcending
worksheets and textbooks so that they may think more democratically with the specific
goal of action (Goldstein, 2007). This approach counters teaching the oppressed to be
passive, so that they remain compliant, the object instead of the subject; waiting to be
told what to do (Mayo, 1955; Shor, 1992).
To bring a praxis of critical literacy into the classroom of this study, participants
acted on their environment, reflected on it, and planned for transformation (Mayo,
1955), thus creating a praxis between theory and practice. As praxis, critical teaching
started with the student generated themes. As the teacher, I brought knowledge and
expertise to the classroom, and I worked to maintain the role of a resource for the
students, intentionally preventing one-way discussions. I encouraged a collaborative,
safe environment in which the students and I learned and taught each other without risk
and in which students took ownership of their own learning (Shor, 1997; Wink, 1997).
163
In critical pedagogy, I began by listening to the students to determine their
concerns. I followed this with a research plan so the participants could look objectively
at their own experiences and concerns issuing from their topic (Freeman & Freeman,
1992; Roberts, 2000; Shor, 1992). Dewey (1915), Freire (1970) and Wink (1997) have
each separately devised a variety of plans for a problem posing pedagogy. This study
followed the phases of Wink’s (1997) problem posing process presented in Figure 1 on
page 24.
Summary of Findings
For this study, data were collected from the artifacts of the class, the writing and
products of the participants, classroom observations, and the final interviews with the
participants. The data were then analyzed using the following guiding questions:
1. What elements supported the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary research project? 2. What elements were constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project? 3. What did students learn as evidenced by their work and interviews in this secondary research project in which the critical problem posing process was utilized?
Research questions one and two were systematically answered following a
process in which the data for each phase of problem posing were coded and analyzed
independently. Each phase’s data generated themes for the analysis. The analysis for
question three was conducted using the work and interviews from the beginning and
end of the problem posing process and described for each individual participant so that
164
there were ten descriptions used as evidence for responding to this question. For this
summary, the findings related to each of the three questions will be discussed
holistically. However, a detailed description of the analysis was presented in Chapter 4.
Support for Problem Posing- Research Question One
In an analysis to determine what elements supported the problem posing process
as evidenced by the work and interviews of my students participating in this secondary
research project, several themes of support emerged.
Supports for problem posing as evidenced by the work of the students:
(a) Previous experience and a peer audience supported insightful and extended peer journal entries as the students began problem posing within their own experiences (phase 1).
(b) The students were supported by collaboration, live sources and the concrete activities of the walk about and problem board as they identified, investigated and posed a problem within their lives (phase 2).
(c). Research models and a collaborative class environment supported the students as they solved the problem together (phase 3).
(d) The students were more likely to complete their action (phase 4) step in problem posing if they identified a clear audience in an early phase and if the audience was close in proximity.
At the beginning of the problem posing process, students’ work was supported
by their own previous experiences and the presence of a peer audience. The work at
this stage of the process was conducted in peer journals in which students responded to
literature, quotes and each other as the journals were passed from student to student.
Student responses were both insightful and extended when they were writing about
issues with which they had previous experiences. In addition, students engaged actively
with each other as a natural and real audience for their discussions.
165
This peer audience provided a springboard for students working collaboratively to
pose problems for their research. Students reviewed their journals, participated in a
walk about in the school, and looked to their world for issues to share with the class as
potential topics for research and action. The group worked together and produced a
substantial list, called the problem board, of possible topics. This problem board
belonged to the class, so any student or group of students could choose freely from the
entire list. Some students took the topics and conducted informal surveys to investigate
further the issues surrounding assorted problems from the class problem board before
they settled on their final choices.
To find and complete the research necessary for the students to address their
problems of choice and to complete the required research report, several models were
presented to the class. The students looked to the models to help them find sources,
both primary and secondary, give credit to their sources, and create action plans for
their audiences. Most students worked with other students to find their resources. Even
students who were working on individual reports would share expertise to help another
student out, if asked. This was a truly collaborative experience in the class where the
students relied on each other to use the school’s databases, sort through sources,
complete surveys, and offer opinions or responses to questions posed by their peers.
When the students were ready to present their findings to their audiences, they
first proposed to the class for feedback. The participants with a clear focus also
possessed a clear message and a clear audience. This, and an audience that was close
in proximity to the participants, supported the completion of the problem posing process.
166
To be complete, the students needed to present their findings to an audience that could
impact the issue in a positive way.
The work and interviews of the participants revealed several elements that
supported the problem posing process. In regards to student experiences, the students
benefited from the peer journal activity as it allowed them an opportunity to bring
forward their prior knowledge and receive an immediate response from the peers. When
the students worked to identify, investigate and pose a problem within their lives, they
were best supported by investigating live sources and collaborating on ideas with their
peers. With the support of models from their literature and models provided by the
instructor, the students were able to solve the problem and create a plan of action.
Finally, a clear focus and purpose, identified early in process, and an audience close in
proximity, supported students’ completion of their actions to finish the problem posing
process successfully.
These were elements that supported problem posing for the participants in this
study. However, there were also constraints to problem posing. These will be shared in
the next section.
Constraints to Problem Posing – Research Question Two
In an analysis of constraints to the problem posing process as evidenced by the
work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project, several themes
emerged.
Constraints to problem posing as evidence by the work of the students:
(a) The lack of previous experience and the negotiation of peer relationships were constraints that prevented students from engaging fully in peer journaling as they began problem posing based on their own experiences (phase 1).
167
(b)The curricular focus on formatting for the research paper was a constraint to problem posing as the students were working together to solve the problem (phase 3).
(c) The low grades that two students earned contributed to their failure to complete their action (phase 4) for problem posing.
(d) Choosing a plan of action late in the process led to one student’s failure to complete an action (phase 4).
(e) When some students chose an audience that was abstract and not immediately accessible on campus, they did not complete their action (phase 4).
At the beginning of the problem posing process, several constraints were
revealed during the peer journal activity. First, just as previous experiences supported
this stage of the process, the lack of previous experience and background knowledge
often led to superficial, brief, or inaccurate exchanges. When the students were familiar
with the issue at hand, they were able to participate fully, but when the issue presented
was unfamiliar to the students, they understandably struggled to make a meaningful
contribution to the peer journal activity.
In addition to this struggle, there was another complex issue regarding peer
interactions. The students seemed to be negotiating peer relationships as they worked
through the topics. When they feared they were stating an opinion that might offend a
peer, they would sometimes qualify their statements. Yet at other times, they seemed to
disregard feelings as they insulted each other personally. This negotiation of personal
relationships was also evident when the students seemed to be looking for a way to
name the issues without “naming names.” Clearly some of the issues addressed were
present in the school, but the students carefully avoided stating specific instances and
the people involved. They relied instead on general pronouns to represent people and
places where these offences occurred.
168
One constraint to problem posing occurred during the topic identification phase,
and although it was a constraint to the problem posing process, it is questionable
whether it was a constraint to the research process or even the success of the final
product. In problem posing, the second phase requires students to “identify, investigate,
[and] pose a problem within your life” (Wink, 1997). When the students filled in the
problem board with issues to consider, they found ideas in several places. The first
ideas came from the peer journals. These journals were used because they recorded
discussion of at least four potential topics. The journals were intended to get the
problem board going before we searched for new topics. The constraint occurred when
two of the groups, representing five of the ten participants, chose topics from these four
prompts. Arguably these issues might have been present in their individual lives, but
they originated from the peer journals. When the students chose these topics, they did
not independently find an issue in their own lives. However, if I am seen as part of the
collaborative group, this argument is weakened. I had seen the issues present in the
students’ lives, or I would not have presented them for discussion in the peer journals.
Thus, student selection of teacher-suggested problems did not appear to impede the
problem posing process over time.
Another constraint was the expectation that each student complete an individual
research paper that had five sources, five quotes, five paraphrases, ten internal
citations, and was five pages long. These expectations represent an orally
communicated department policy. Teachers may go beyond these minimal
expectations, but the research assignment must culminate in a research paper
completed by each individual student that meets these requirements. At the end of
169
phase 3, in the problem posing process, the students focused on solving the problem
together, and for the most part, the students worked collaboratively to complete the
research papers. Students who worked in a group divided up the research tasks and
approached the same topic from multiple perspectives. Five students completed their
research assignments in this way and then submitted individual research papers to be
graded. The constraint occurred because the students had to compose individual
papers that met required criteria, and although some students excelled at this structure,
others struggled with the format, and earned low grades.
This grading was seen as contributing another constraint because two of the
students who earned failing grades on this particular product did not complete the action
phase of problem posing. Both students were discouraged because they had worked
hard on their assignments and received low grades. They believed low grades reflected
on their message and their ability to affect change. In addition, although I had
participated collaboratively throughout the process, the act of grading the papers was
not collaborative. Based on their written reflections, these two students reacted
negatively to my change of role.
Another constraint for students completing their action was a lack of clear focus
or purpose for action at the end of the research report. Students who had a clear plan
completed their action, and the opposite occurred for students who did not have a clear
plan.
A final constraint for completing the action phase of problem posing related to the
ease of access to an audience. Students with audiences at the school were successful
in completing their action. Conversely, the further from the campus and the more
170
abstract the audience, the less likely the students were to complete the action. Potential
audiences range from the writer composing self-reflection, where the student audience
is the self writing for the purpose of a deeper understanding of the content, to a global
audience where the writer addresses the world at large. Students who wrote to
audiences they already knew, found them easily available for presentations or letters.
Students found it harder to prepare a presentation for an audience that was unfamiliar
and distant. A distant and generic audience also limited the types of presentations that
were possible. Though students could potentially impact and affect these audiences, in
this study, remote audiences were a barrier to success of the action phase of problem
posing.
In summary, several constraints influenced the success of students participating
in the problem posing process. At the beginning during peer journaling, when the
students brought forward their previous knowledge; they often lacked relevant
experiences, or provided mistaken information when they shared together. Also
because the students were working together, they struggled to specify some problems
in their own social context, sometimes relying on vague descriptions or offsetting
controversial comments with qualifiers. A possible constraint to identifying, investigating
and posing a problem was that half of the students ultimately chose a topic that was first
introduced by the instructor rather than using germane topics initiated from their own
lives. An additional constraint to this problem posing process occurred because of a
mandate in the curriculum that all students must write an individual research paper.
Though some students still worked together to solve their posed problem, many
students left the group to work individually on their topics and did not receive as much
171
support or share resources and insights. Finally, action was prevented when students
did not clearly identify a focus and purpose early in the process, when students received
a bad grade on an early assignment in the unit, and when the audience was located off
campus.
The Impact of Problem Posing in the English Research Assignment – Research
Question Three
The students showed their learning through the secondary research project in
which the critical problem posing process was utilized in their work and interviews.
The impact of problem posing included the following:
(a) The students learned relevant research skills as they engaged in the problem posing process.
(b) The students were able to synthesize data and create action plans as they participated in the instructional plan, based on problem posing.
(c) The problem posing process facilitated critical growth when the process was followed.
(d) The student participation in problem posing informed and supported the students’ ability to look for opportunities to act on issues in their lives.
Each of the students showed growth in the ability to complete the multi-step
research process. However, not all of the students increased their critical awareness.
When two students failed the final assignment because of their use of citations in the
text, the grading failed to acknowledge their ability to synthesize and produce a
document that was focused and insightful. Thus the grading procedure obscured
successes for those students who failed the assignment and did not complete the action
phase of problem posing.
172
Bethany’s engagement in problem posing was cut short when she changed focus
because of her topic decision, and Nathan and Neal’s group project did not reach its
intended audience. However, all three of these students did complete the academic
assignment, and attempted the critical approach until the final action stage. In addition,
Brett did not complete his final action phase because of personal time constraints.
Without question, the problem posing process facilitated the learning of all of the
participants as they worked through the multi-step research unit that was guided by the
problem posing phases, and for the students who completed the final action phase of
the process, the success was evident in their reflections and their interviews. Three
students, Justin, Morgan, and Noah, expressed interest in continuing to pursue their
topics beyond the class assignment.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The use of a case study methodology and the sample size of this project indicate
that the analysis, findings, and conclusions may contribute to the literature of critical
literacy but are not generalizable to other situations. As described in the literature, the
traditional research approach tends to disconnect students from their personal
environments and experiences (Giroux, 1997). This disconnect “comes from writing
assignments that fail to value the lives, cultures, and interests of the writers” (Shafer,
1999, p. 46). One of the goals attained in this study was to provide a clear purpose and
audience for the student research process so that students felt connected to their self-
selected topics. Through problem posing, the participants in this study came to conduct
“real research” in which they experienced “careful listening and observation, written
173
notes, background reading, group discussion and collaborative effort, library research,
and firsthand experience” ("Research with a Purpose," 1992).
The analysis, findings, and conclusions contribute to the literature in three areas:
audience, reflection, and grading. Conclusions and recommendations in each of these
three areas are described.
Audience
The findings of this study support writing activities that engage students with an
authentic audience. According to Moffett (1983), student motivation is improved when
students are communicating with real audiences. In this study, the participants
communicated with their peers in the peer journaling activity (Cziko, 1996) and with a
real audience when they completed their actions. When the students wrote to these
audiences, they were motivated by the conversation to engage with each other. Their
journal writing became a means for completing conversations not motivated by a grade
or by a fear they would be disciplined for not participating because the journals were not
graded. For the presentations to an audience, the students received a completion
grade. This was to encourage them to write because they had something to say and
someone to address. Factors other than grades influenced student success in
communicating their work.
In addition to the importance of a purposeful audience, the findings of this study
suggest that the proximity of the audience impacts the success of students’ completing
action in the problem posing process. Moffett (1988) identified four ways to reach an
audience, beginning with self and extending outwards to the public. See figure 5.
174
In this study, publication occurred in the form referred to as action. For the
purpose of this study, the participants were asked to find an audience beyond the
classroom. These instructions meant neither they, nor their classroom peers and
instructor, could serve as an audience. However, publication included what Moffett
considered correspondence. An expansion on his description of audience, based on this
study, included a hierarchy of audience in terms of proximity to the student.
Figure 10 illuminates a finding that a barrier exists for students who seek an
audience beyond the school campus. This finding adds to the literature because it
informs the instruction of students working with audiences. If a student seeks a distant
and abstract audience, additional supports should be added to the instructional
framework to ensure student success. A deliberate effort on my part might have
improved the rate of success. For example, if a student’s chosen audience were a
government official, I could schedule time to edit the piece with the students and offer to
mail the product for the students. In the case of the student who sought a meeting with
the parks and recreation department, class time could have been provided for the
student to call the parks department to set up an appointment, so the student would
have acted on his commitment to complete the action.
Reflection
Reflection, “the means by which we work through beliefs and assumptions,
assessing their validity in the light of new experiences or knowledge” (Cranton, 2002, p.
65), was an important activity for reinforcing learning and assisting in the development
of an understanding and framework for the learning that could be put to future use
175
(Boud, 1985). Reflection encourages thinking (Wink, 1997). When teachers plan time
for students to stop and reflect on their work, two things occur: (a) the students gain an
opportunity to become aware of their thinking and their actions, and (b) the students
connect what they know to themselves and society (Freire, 1970; Krashen, 2001; Wink,
1997). The use of reflection prevents transmission of knowledge where the students
merely repeat the facts they have learned at a transitional level of learning. Instead,
students reflect on their learning in a meaningful way (Shor, 1992). Reflection allows
students to be aware of their participation, not as a “consumption of ideas but rather a
product of action” (Freire, 1970; Hasbrook, 2002, p. 3-8).
The findings of this study show that reflection occurred, although this activity was
not included in Wink’s description of the problem posing process (Wink, 1997).
However, the process of writing the research paper, as students solved the problem
together, provided an opportunity to reflect on the problem, consider the ideas of others,
and choose a plan to meet the needs of the topic. This was a reflective activity for the
students in the research process. In addition, the inclusion of reflective journaling and
an interview at the end of the unit provided two more opportunities for students to
reflect. These reflections were powerful experiences for the students. They recalled the
work that they had accomplished, made plans to continue to pursue topics of interest,
and voiced concerns about issues they had identified in the process. As Hasbrook
described, the reflection allowed the students to “equitably [re-position] one’s
relationship with others” (2002, p. 8).
This research supports the literature that describes the problem posing process
as a quality framework for the research process in a secondary setting. However, this
176
study indicates that the addition of planned reflective activities at the third phase and as
a fifth phase would increase the students’ ability to make meaningful connections
between the research and their own lives. Figure 11 presents a model of the problem
posing process with these changes in place.
Figure12. Problem posing process with reflections added.
(Modified from Wink, 1997)
Grading
English teachers are pressured by other departments to teach the skills of the
research paper with an emphasis on finding relevant sources, embedding them into
papers, and including correct citations and bibliographies (Ballenger, 1992), so it is not
a surprise that the rubrics designed to grade research papers emphasize the form over
177
the content (Ballenger, 1992). However, this format driven emphasis in grading posits
the teacher as subject and student as object. Shor (1992) suggested “narrative grading
rather than only number or letter grades, to encourage serious dialogue between
student and teacher about the quality of the work” (p. 132). However, Shor recognized
the challenges of working in a school system whose curriculum is centered on
textbooks, standardized tests, and a numeric grading system. He explained that “these
traditional practices restrict student-centered, dialogic, and participatory education” (p.
144). Elbow (2000) added that the use of numeric grades is “untrustworthy” as
“descriptors for complex human performances” (p. 407). Instead he suggested using
criteria because “it helps students to engage in valid and productive self-
evaluation…and it makes grades more informative and useful” (pp. 714-715).
The findings of this study support Elbow and Shor’s concerns regarding grading.
The rubrics used for this study were intentionally aligned with the rubrics used
throughout the school that emphasized the form and format of the paper over the
content. So although all of the students were capable, to some degree, of synthesizing
the research on their topics, two of them, because they did not master the skills of
citation, failed. Instead of encouraging these students to improve their performance in
these skills, low grades caused them to shut down and not progress with the problem
posing process. These students would have benefited from an assessment that allowed
more opportunities for revision and encouraged ongoing growth. They did not learn the
skill, and they received a failing grade. They did not meet the objective, and after the
grade was assigned, they were not required to correct their mistakes.
178
This study casts a long shadow over the current grading practices. The data in
this study show that low grades themselves had a negative impact on student
engagement and learning. Conversely, none of the students reported feeling more
confident because they received good grades. Good grades did not seem to support
problem posing. Beyond this, the grades awarded did not adequately capture the
growth of the students. Using an objective rubric to measure subjective growth is a
mismatch. However, because secondary teachers confront such large quantities of
papers and assignments, they often rely on rubrics that capture only a short list of
curriculum goals. Colleges request grade point average (GPA) and class rank, parents
monitor their students, and schools perform statistical feats of weighting and ranking
using numbers that often, as shown in this study, inadequately represent the students’
learning and potential. Assessment should support and inform student learning. It
should give the student a voice. Teachers and districts need to support students in a
transformative experience with supportive assessments that encourage them to take
risks and learn from their mistakes. As an example of supportive assessments, narrative
grading could occur at several points in the process, thus allowing the student and the
teacher an opportunity to evaluate progress and growth and recognize learning based
on the work competed. If the current rubrics had to be used, the ability for students to
correct and reassess would not only have supported problem posing, but it would have
also have supported the learning of the skills required to format a research paper
properly.
179
Recommendations
In this section, recommendations will be made for further research and policy
decisions, based on the findings in this study. Three recommendations for future studies
will be shared. In addition, several instructional recommendations regarding the problem
posing process, and finally, policy recommendations at the federal, state and local level
will be made.
Further Study
When the students completed their research and sought their audiences, several
participants addressed their issues with the school administration. However, it seemed
that the administration was not equipped to respond to student requests. This started
with the last-minute switch of audience from the principal of the school to the assistant
principal. Although I doubt it was his intention, the principal diminished student voice by
not giving them priority in his schedule. When the assistant principal worked on his
computer as the students presented instead of giving them his undivided attention, he
belittled the importance of their message. The students came with issues and possible
solutions they were willing to work on with the principal, but none of the proposals
progressed past the action stage. Although I believe the principals could have been
more responsive, there is not a system in place for students to request changes or for
implementation of reasonable requests from students. In this case, the requests were
reasonable. The request for a study hall could have been accomplished as an after-
school activity through the end of the year to see whether it was attended. The school
pays for a teacher to monitor morning detentions, so it seems that an after-school study
180
hall could have been accomplished with the same structure. The participants working on
cheating distributed their brochures to the faculty, but they also wanted a committee of
teachers and students to work on the problem in the school by developing an honor
code. This solution would have been free to the school because it required only
volunteers from the faculty and student body, but it did not occur.
Further research that explores the response of the school administrations when
confronted with the results of problem posing is necessary to inform practitioners in the
field on how to better prepare audiences and to help students achieve a more favorable
response. It is likely that administrators do not have systems in place to respond to
student requests. After this study, I decided that in the future I would meet with the
administrators before their meeting with students to prepare them to listen and respond
to the students’ action presentations.
Another study that would support the use of problem posing in the classroom is a
longitudinal study of student participants in problem posing. These students could be
interviewed or surveyed over the next few years after their first experience to see
whether they choose to participate in another problem posing project on their own.
When and if they do choose to participate, do they follow the same phases, or do they
modify their approach based on what they have learned from exposure to the process?
Since this process was intended to lead to a transformative experience, I expect that
students would continue to use the process to address social needs in their community.
Lastly, this study has given me new insight into the power of reflection. Working
to complete this study, I have started to read the literature on the use, purpose, and the
value of the reflective experience. If I were to start this study again, I would recommend
181
formal reflection at every stage of the problem posing process. The impact of the
reflections that I required for this study suggests that student experience of
transformation could increase with more attention to making deeper connections to their
learning. It would be interesting to duplicate this study with additional reflections to see
whether students experience a stronger transformative experience.
Policy
This section will address policy recommendations based on the results, findings
and the experience of conducting this study. At the national level a recommendation is
made to deemphasize the testing system that focuses on accountability over critical
awareness. Next, the focus moves to the state level and the problems with the research
strands of the new Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills document. Finally, a
recommendation is made at the local level to address concerns with the district
assessment policy.
National
This assignment consumed a large quantity of time, time that many teachers feel
pressured to use for teaching and reviewing content that is tested on state and national
assessments. So, as the concern about the appropriate strategy for teaching the
research process grows, teachers struggle to justify the continued practice of teaching
research reporting (Jago & Gardner, 1999). National expectations that testing would
“focus teachers’ instruction or improve the curriculum” is rejected by teachers, who
believe that No Child Left Behind requirements instead “narrowed the curriculum and
182
focused instruction on the tested subjects” (Sunderman, 2005, p. 96). Problem posing
and critical skills that relate to working in a world beyond the classroom are not tested,
so increasingly, they are not taught. However, as Dewey explains, students need to
acquire basic skills.
That which interests us most is naturally the progress made by the individual child of our acquaintance, his normal physical development, his advance in ability to read, write and figure, his growth in the knowledge of geography and history, improvement in manners, habits of promptness, order and industry – it is from such standards as these that we judge the world of the school. And rightly so. (1915, p. 5)
However, it is also important to remember that an education that serves democracy and
transforms its citizens must move beyond this narrow focus.
Yet the range of the outlook needs to be enlarged. What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child, that must the community want for all of its children. Any other ideal for our schools is narrow and unlovely; acted upon, it destroys our democracy (Dewey, 1915, p. 5).
The narrow focus arising from standardized testing does not allow room in the
curriculum for transformative pedagogy where “the goal includes generating knowledge,
but extends from the classroom to the world” (Wink, 1997, p. 115). Today’s students
must take their knowledge and extend it to action beyond the classroom in new and
creative ways to meet the needs of the global community in which they will need to
interact and earn a living (Freidman, 2008; Pink, 2006). The current high stakes testing
environment is detrimental to both the students’ future and the perpetuation of
democracy when the curriculum is narrowed to the requirements of the annual test.
Accountability standards at the national level should be relaxed to provide teachers an
opportunity and the time to extend lessons beyond content knowledge to transformative
183
action and reflection that would allow the students an opportunity to engage in the real
world.
The federal government must consider the narrow focus that has been created in
the environment of high stakes testing resulting from No Child Left Behind and find
alternative ways to encourage growth in schools that support democracy over low level
skill development.
State
The new TEKS, recently adopted by the State Board of Education (SBOE), will
be implemented in the 2009-2010 school year. The TEKS include four objectives that
deal with the research process. However, these objectives fail to connect the research
process in a meaningful way to the real world research that is conducted beyond the
classroom. For example, the TEKS begin with development of a focus based on the
“major research topic” instead of student discovery of a topic of interest or need from
their own environment. The final step calls for the student to “provide an analysis for the
audience that reflects a logical progression of ideas and a clearly stated point of view…
[with] evidence in support of a clear thesis,…[and] graphics and illustrations”("TEKS
Alignment," 2008). This document does not include an expectation of publishing that
would carry analysis to an audience.
Because the research strands of the TEKS are shallow and vague, it will be up to
the teacher to extend the assignment to help the students engage in a meaningful way.
When teachers will find time is a concern. Another concern is the misalignment of the
new TEKS. In tenth grade, the students are expected to complete eleven products
184
based on the written, research, media and listening and speaking strands ("TEKS
Alignment," 2008; Tyroff, 2008) in addition to engaging in reading and learning to
identify and utilize literary elements.
Because this document has already been approved by the State Board of
Education, my recommendation is for the district curriculum coordinators. District
curriculum coordinators will have to work hard to compact these requirements so that
multiple objectives can be met by fewer products. Critical pedagogy must be a central
goal of the curriculum writing process. If critical pedagogy is not a goal of the English
language arts learning process at the local level of curriculum development, it will be
lost in the overwhelming task of fitting and aligning this newly created document.
Local
The assessment handbook used in the district where this study was conducted
hindered its progression in two ways. The first hindrance was its encouragement of the
use of common assessments. The second was the implication verified in oral
instructions delivered at the campus level that a summative assessment should be
submitted on a single due date. The intent of the handbook was to develop a
meaningful assessment framework that “[promotes] consistency and alignment of
assessment throughout the school district”("[District Name] Local Assessment
Handbook," 2008, ¶ 1). Because of parental pressure for equity in grading in “like
courses,” the district encourages the multiple teachers of a single course to plan and
assess together using common assessments. This eliminates a possible argument that
one course is more difficult than another, which might lead to an unfair advantage for a
185
student in the easier course when calculating a student’s GPAs. Common assessments
are required for semester exams, and grade-level teams generally use the same tests in
all of the classes. A teacher who wants to change an assessment must convince the
entire team to change or risk an accusation of not working with the team. Changing the
expectation for like-assessments will be difficult as this has become part of the school
culture. This change calls for recognition that innovative teaching from individuals and
teams can produce changes that encourage student engagement.
Also, the district’s zero late work policy implies that assignments are due on a
singular date. However, this has been challenged by teachers who have assessed
students over several dates in violation of a testing calendar that alternates the dates on
which each subject area may be tested. Even when the teachers use only the dates
allotted to them on the testing calendar, they must gain specific permission to extend an
assessment for more than one day. Major projects, such as the assignments of this
study, have a final due date. They are not eligible for a retake if a student fails. Thus,
my hands were tied when I realized that I had students who had turned in research
reports that needed revisions. The students were prevented by policy from correcting
their citations. This policy is in place to prevent students from using the retest policy to
turn in late essays and projects. However, students need the opportunity for these
projects to be reassessed just as they need the opportunity to retake objective tests.
This policy should be rewritten so that students may reattempt any summative
evaluation, including long-term essays and projects. This would encourage more
revision and ultimately student learning.
186
Reflections on the Research Experience
From the perspective of critical theorists, the limitations and constraints of
“solving problem together” (Wink 2007) are beyond the classroom, and they silenced
me as well as the students. Knobel (2007) describes critical literacy as participating in
activities that address social problems through literacy. I adopted critical theory and
what a critical theorist would say as my stance for this work, but I struggled just as the
students did with issues of power.
I held the power for assessing the students’ learning, and that process was
inequitable. As I struggled to maintain the grading structured utilized in other classes; I
release the possibility that the students might have a voice in how they were scored.
Together, the students and I were under the constraints of a grading system that is
dependent upon tradition and resists innovation. Years of parent complaints influenced
the administration and teachers to rigidly control all aspects of grading with objective
rubrics and lock-step instructional plans in an attempt to provide equality for all
students, but this structure reduces voice of teacher in the measurement of learning in
the school and removes the possibility of teachers inviting students to be part of the
assessment process.
In addition, as the students chose their topics, I believed at the start of this
project that I would be able to support any topic that the students chose. I was
prepared for students to choose topics that were politically and socially uncomfortable.
However, when Bethany chose the topic of the legalization of marijuana, I was
concerned that it would become known that I had empowered a student to seek an
audience for legalizing marijuana in a school that was striving to send a clear message
187
to the students that drug use would not be tolerated. Though it was possible that the
student could have completed the assignment, with no one beyond the class and her
specific audience learning of her work, it seemed unlikely. Because of the destructive
nature of the “parent talk” and teacher gossip that can lead to class assignment
changes or non renewal of contracts, I disallowed a student selected topic. Bethany’s
voice was constrained, and I oppressed her free speech, her freedom to have
independent thoughts, and ultimately her message, with the constraints of her
assignment.
Finally, when the students took their research to their audiences in the school,
their concerns were not valued by the administration. When the administration changed
their appointments and dismissed their work, the students came to see that their voice
was not heard. Some of the students were resilient, planning to return to speak again,
but others were finished with their assignments. The message to the students: The
adults hold the power in this school, and for students to make changes, they must enter
the world of adults and make the arguments in adult language and hope for an adult to
make the decision to respond positively. The students struggle to adopt this voice
because they are students, and they speak in the language from below as Ohmann
(1996) explained.
The administrators are busy. As accountability systems strangle their sense of
power in the schools, the overburdened administrator does not listen to students’ plans
for change that would require additional work on the part of the administrator and others
in the school. It may seem to the principals that by controlling the school, they are
minimizing extraneous assignments. Instead of sharing the responsibility of the work in
188
the school with the students and teachers, they maintain the power and the
responsibility.
To engage students in the third idiom as described by Shor (1997), all of the
members of the school must interact in a common language and an equitable
environment. As the teacher, in this process, I believed that the students would be
successful in their pursuit of change, but the students, all of them, encountered barriers
that prevented their success. However, the students did gain critical literacy to the
extent that they began reading the world in addition to the word (Freire, 1970; Shor,
1997; Wink, 1997). Creating the third idiom in our school should be a campus goal.
When students engage in critical literacy, teachers should expect to encounter
constraints of power, self censorship, and political risks. In this study, questions of free
choice of topics and free speech were raised and were not ultimately addressed.
However, as an English teacher, my practice has been enriched by the work of this
study. The problem posing process in this study showed the potential for success of
clear purpose-setting, the availability of authentic audiences, the analysis of
professional models, the engagement of collaborative research teams, and the
evaluation of the process through reflection. An extended use of problem posing beyond
a single unit in a course has the potential to improve the balance of power in a school
setting.
Summary
Following the German model of researchers’ in specific fields completing writing
reports, the American tradition of the research paper began shortly after the Civil War
189
and continues to be practiced in the same form today in English classes across the
country. Ballenger (1992) and Shook (1988) argue that the paper should be purposeful,
so students can connect their topics to their lives beyond school as a form of
informational literacy. Both Shor (1992) and Elbow (2000) were concerned about the
focus on the grade over the process in report writing. This misguided effort has the
effect of minimizing student voice and valuing editing skills above the critical thinking
skills needed to complete research. To improve the assignment, the purpose of
research for social action was supported in the literature (H. Giroux, 1997; Lawrence,
1999; Mancina, 2005; McKenna & McKenna, 2000; Shafer, 1999; Shor, 1992; Slack,
2001; Williams, 1993).
Wink’s (1997) problem posing praxis, based on Freire (1970), connects the
theory of critical literacy to the student research paper. Starting with their own
experiences, students develop as they critically analyze their environment (Freire, 1970;
Shor, 1997). Freire’s purpose in problem posing is to solve a social problem, in contrast
to Dewey, whose educational process uses a purpose to guide instruction. Wink
achieves a purposeful education by requiring that “problem posing always ends in
action” (1997, p. 109). This complements the praxis of critical literacy that supports the
students looking at their environment with a critical eye, so they can “read the world”
(Freire, 1970; Shor, 1997; Wink, 1997). When this occurs in a equitable classroom, it
creates the third idiom where student and teacher interact in colloquial language, and
intellectual empowerment grows (Shor, 1992). This classroom setting was a goal in this
study.
190
Ohmann calls critical literacy “literacy from below,” where participants actively
question the status quo and imagine solutions (Ohmann, 1996). Based on this literature,
the problem posing process as described by Wink (1997) was utilized in the research
process in a tenth grade class setting to determine if the English class research
experience was facilitated by a critical problem posing process as evidenced by the
work and interviews of my students in this secondary research project. The work of the
students were analyzed to determine the supports and constraints of this process that
begins with the student experiences and ends with an action phase (Wink, 1997).
Based on the literature, the students working in this process learn to think more
democratically with the specific goal or action (Goldstein, 2007) and be involved in
change and learn in an environment with hope, struggle and a pedagogy of
transformation (Freire, 1970; Roberts, 2000).
To conclude, Wink’s process, grounded in Freire’s approach, and consistent with
Dewey and others who advocate inquiry, action, and relevance was the framework for
the research process described in this study. This description will fill a void in the
literature that connects the relevance and engagement of students participating in
Wink’s problem posing process to the high school research paper. This study
contributes to the body of knowledge about inquiry, critical pedagogy and high school
English instruction.
191
APPENDIX A
RESEARCH QUESTION CHECKLIST
192
Research Question Checklist
General Issue Topic: _______________________________________
Interested Group Members (2-5):
1. ______________________________________________________
2. ______________________________________________________
3. ______________________________________________________
4. ______________________________________________________
5. ______________________________________________________
Research Question: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Question/Topic Checklist: YES/NO All the members of the group are interested in this topic. YES/NO Does this question require more than a yes or no answer? YES/NO Does this topic need a solution? YES/NO Does this topic address a need to others beyond the members of this
group? Who? __________________________________________ YES/NO Can you foresee possible ways to address this issue that lead to a
possible solution or at least a change to make the situation better? YES/NO Do all of the members of the group agree with this research question as
their guide to the research assignment? YES/NO Do all of the members of the group agree to work cooperatively to
complete their individual assignments on time and share their research to help everyone in the group to produce complementing literary multi-genre pieces?
193
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
194
Informed Consent Form
Before agreeing to your student’s participation in this research study, it is important that you read
and understand the following explanation of the purpose and benefits of the study and how it will
be conducted.
Title of Study: A Critical Approach to the Research Process
Principal Investigator: Carol L. Revelle, a doctoral candidate in the University of North Texas
(UNT) Department of Teacher Education and Administration.
Purpose of the Study: You are being asked to allow your child to participate in a research study
in which your child’s work in a journal and a research project will be read for evidence of
insightful thinking about important social issues in the student’s environment. The purpose of the
study is to determine the usefulness of regular reflections through journal writing on your child’s
understanding and awareness of social issues.
Study Procedures: The students will be asked to write and respond to peers in a multi-class
journal on a critical issue topic prompt. A multi-class journal is a class set of composition books
that the students write in each period. The journals rotate and each student creates a dialogue
with the students who sit in his/her seat throughout the school day. Critical issue topic prompts
are questions or statements provided to the students to encourage writing about a real topic that
has real consequences beyond the class setting. Possible topics can include issues such as student
cheating, school decision making, or the effects of immigration discussions in the media, but the
students may develop their own topic for research based on their own experiences and
observations. After the journals are complete, the students will work to complete a research
assignment that addresses this issue and attempt to work toward a solution. The journals,
research products, interviews, teacher notes, and observation notes will be analyzed for this
study. The student work will take place in class during normal class time and will not take any
more time in or out of class than the traditional research paper assignment. All students will
participate in the assignment, but student work without signed waivers will not be considered for
this study. This activity is part of the regular instructional approach and will not add additional
requirements that are not a part of a typical instructional activity.
At the end of the project, the student will participate in a short interview, about five minutes
long, with the researcher to answer questions about his/her project. There will be an audio
recording of the interview.
Foreseeable Risks: No foreseeable risks are involved in this study.
Benefits to the Subjects or Others: I expect the project to benefit your child by providing
him/her with an opportunity to have a voice on a critical issue. In addition, this study will
contribute to the field of education a description of an authentic research assignment in a regular
classroom.
Procedures for Maintaining Confidentiality of Research Records: Reports from this study
will replace student names with pseudonyms to protect confidentiality. Signed consent forms
will be kept in a locked file drawer with the students’ research materials and products. Research
records such as journals and research products will be kept for three years past the end of the
study per federal regulations. The confidentiality of your child’s individual information will be
maintained in any publications or presentations regarding this study.
195
Questions about the Study: If you have any questions about the study, you may
contact Carol Revelle at ---.---.----, or the faculty advisor, Dr. Mary Harris, UNT
Department of Teacher Education and Administration, at 940-565-4327.
Research Participants’ Rights: Your signature below indicates that you have
read or have had read to you all of the above and that you confirm all of the
following:
• You understand that you do not have to allow your child to take part in
this study, and your refusal to allow your child to participate or your
decision to withdraw him/her from the study will involve no penalty or
loss of rights or benefits. The study personnel may choose to stop your
child’s participation at any time.
• You understand why the study is being conducted and how it will be
performed.
• You understand your rights as the parent/guardian of a research participant
and you voluntarily consent to your child’s participation in this study.
• You have been told you will receive a copy of this form.
_______________________________ Printed Name
of Parent or Guardian
________________________________ _______________ Signature
of Parent or Guardian Date
This research project has been reviewed and approved by the UNT Institutional
Review Board (940) 565-3940. Contact the UNT IRB with any questions
regarding your child’s rights as a research subject.
______________________________________ _____________
Signature of Principal Investigator or Designee Date
196
APPENDIX C
STUDENT ASSENT FORM
197
Student Assent Form
You are being asked to be part of a research project being done by the University of North Texas
Department of Teacher Education and Administration.
You will be asked to write and respond to peers in a multi-class journal on a critical issue topic
prompt. A multi-class journal is a class set of composition books that the students write in each
period. The journals rotate and each student creates a dialogue with the students who sit in
his/her seat throughout the school day. Critical issue topic prompts are questions or statements
provided to the students to encourage writing about a real topic that has real consequences
beyond the class setting. Possible topics can include issues such as student cheating, school
decision making, or the effects of immigration discussions in the media, but you may develop
your own topic for research based on your own experiences and observations. After the journals
are complete, you will work to complete a research assignment that addresses this issue and
attempt to work toward a solution. The journals, research products, interviews, teacher notes, and
observation notes will be analyzed for this study. Your work will take place in class during
normal class time and will not take any more time in or out of class than the traditional research
paper assignment. You will participate in the assignment, but work without signed informed
consent form will not be considered for this study. This activity is part of the regular
instructional approach and will not add additional requirements that are not a part of a typical
instructional activity.
At the end of the project, the student will participate in a short interview, about five minutes
long, with the researcher to answer questions about his/her project. There will be an audio
recording of the interview.
Your course grade will not be affected by your decision regarding participation in this research
study.
If you decide to be part of this study, please remember you can stop participating any time you
want to.
If you would like to be part of this study, please sign your name below.
_________________________ __________________ Signature of
Student Date
_________________________________ __________________ Signature of
Principal Investigator or Designee Date
198
APPENDIX D
SUPERSIZE ME: VIDEO GUIDE
199
Supersize Me: Video Guide
The RESEARCHER in this film is ________________________________. (2pts) ________________________________ is the McDonald’s Founder. (2 pts) Where do you think the statistics in the beginning of the film could come from? (4 pts) What different types of doctors are involved in this case study/ experiment? (2 pts each)
1. ________________________________ 2. ________________________________
3. ________________________________
What types of RESEARCH SOURCES are used in this film? (2 pts each)
1. ________________________________
2. ________________________________
3. ________________________________
4. ________________________________ In an ________________________________ (research source), the researcher talks to different people, scholars, or experts to find information. (2 pts) The researcher in this film interviewed some of the following: (2 pts each)
1. ________________________________
2. ________________________________
3. ________________________________
4. ________________________________ In a ________________________________ (research source), people tell their own personal stories to enlighten others and to establish facts in the spirit of research. (2 pts) The researcher in this film gathered stories from some of the following people: (2 pts each)
1. ________________________________
2. ________________________________ “There is ____________ vending machine for every 97 Americans.” (2 pts) “One out of every __________ children will develop diabetes.” (2 pts) Our small size French fry is the ________________________________ size in France! (2 pts) A calorie is defined as: (4 pts)
200
How long is the researcher’s McDonald’s binge? (2 pts) ________________________________ How is the research done in this video like a research paper? (4 pts) How did he publish the results of his findings? How do you think his CASE STUDY impacted Americans? (4 pts) Who is the intended audience of the researcher’s study? ____________________________________________________ (2 pts) In your opinion, what 5 questions began his study? (5 pts each)
1. ___________________________________________________? 2. ____________________________________________________?
3. ____________________________________________________?
4. ____________________________________________________?
5. ____________________________________________________?
201
APPENDIX E
INTERNET CHECKLIST
202
Internet Checklist
An Internet source is a site found on the World Wide Web. BEFORE you use a site as a research source, use this checklist to determine its credibility and reliability. Attach this checklist to your annotated bibliography to prove that your internet site is legitimate. If you cannot find all of the information about the site, DO NOT use it as a source.
• Title of Article/Document/Message: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
• Author’s/Institution/Organization name: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
• Author’s title or position: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
• Date of Web page’s creation: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
• Author’s contact information: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
• What is the URL address? ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
• What is the date that you visited the site? ________________________________________________________________
• What is the bibliographic citation for this site? ______For this assignment, your citation goes on the top of the research double column notes page.__________________________________________________________
1. What type of specific facts is in the site that you plan to use for your research project? ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
2. What other source are you using that confirms the accuracy of the facts listed in #1? ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________
3. What additional sources (bibliography) listed in the site might you use for your project? ________________________________________________________________
203
APPENDIX F
RESEARCH DOUBLE COLUMN NOTES
204
Research Double Column Notes
Source Citation (Use the MLA Style Sheet to format your citation before you begin).
Important Quotes from the Text
Page No.
Paraphrased
Summary of the Entire Article
205
APPENDIX G
RESEARCH SUMMARY RUBRIC
206
Research Summary Rubric
STUDENT SCORED
Scoring Item Scoring Focus Points Available Points Earned
What? Content 10 Points Thesis Quality 10 Points So What? Content / Research Utilized 20 Points Now What? Content 10 Points 5 Paraphrases Quality/ Format of Citation 10 Points 5 Quotes Quality/ Format of Citation 10 Points MLA Format Correct Format 10 Points Bibliography Correct Format and at least
Five Sources 10 Points
Mechanics Grammar and Usage 5 Points Rubric & Electronic Copy Top Rubric Scored by
Student 5 Points
Total Points Available 100 Points
Research Summary Rubric – TEACHER SCORED Scoring Item Scoring Focus Points Available Points Earned
What? Content 10 Points Thesis Quality 10 Points So What? Content / Research Utilized 20 Points Now What? Content 10 Points 5 Paraphrases Quality/ Format of Citation 10 Points 5 Quotes Quality/ Format of Citation 10 Points MLA Format Correct Format 10 Points Bibliography Correct Format and at least
Five Sources 10 Points
Mechanics Grammar and Usage 5 Points Rubric & Electronic Copy Top Rubric Scored by
Student 5 Points
Total Points Available 100 Points Comments:
207
APPENDIX H
MULTI-GENRE RESEARCH PROJECT, PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
208
Multi-Genre Research Project, Presentation and Evaluation
What is a literary multi-genre research project?
It is important to be able to use our communicative skills to affect social change. For this project, each
student researcher will complete a literary genre research project using the information gathered on
his/her issue. For example, if the research question addresses chewing gum in school, he/she could
address the issue with a variety of literary genres such as an oral presentation to an administrator
requesting a change in policy, a petition written and signed by students asking for the administration to
consider the research, or a short play produced and published on KCBY to share the research with the
student body. Develop a project that works to solve or address the issue addressed in the research
question. The projects will be presented to the class on ______________ (date) and will then proceed to
the intended audience.
Research Project Checklist
_____ I have completed our Research Project Plan of Work _______(Date).
_____ I have presented our plan to the class _________(Date).
_____ I have gathered materials and made a draft of the project __________(Date).
_____ I have completed our final project and checked it against the rubric ________ (Date).
_____ I have completed our personal evaluation and the evaluation of the other teams’
products ___________(Date).
RUBRIC
Addresses the problem/issue in the research question (10 Points)
Research-based project with information from the research present (10 Points)
Specific audience / appropriate for that audience (10 Points)
Clear understanding of audience (10 Points)
Practical plan to reach audience (10 Points)
Well-done, neat, and free of mistakes (10 Points)
Project does something that isn’t already being done (10 Points)
Completed evaluation form (10 Points)
Presentation – Organized (10 Points)
Presentation – Peer Evaluations (10 Points)
Presented to real audience – Evidence Required (5 Points)
How is the research present in the final product? (Give an example).
209
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Who is the audience and how is this audience appropriate for this topic? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Is there a clear understanding of the audience present in the project? What is directed at the target audience? Name: ______________________________
Evaluation Form
How does the research project address the problem/issue in the research question? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Is there a plan to reach the audience, and is it practical? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Is the research project well-done, neat, and free of mistakes? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Does the research project do something that isn’t already being done? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What else needs to be said about the project? (Other comments) __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ How does this project compare to the rubric? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
210
APPENDIX I
CODE GRAPHIC
211
Code Graphic
212
WORKS CITED
Adelstein, M. E., & Pival, J. G. (1994). The writing commitment. New York: Harcourt.
Anderson, G. L., & Irvine, P. (1993). Informing critical literacy with ethnography. In C.
Lankshear & P. L. McLaren (Eds.), Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the
postmodern (pp. 81 - 104). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Ardizzone, L. (2007). Listening to youth voices: Activism and critical pedagogy. In R. A.
Goldstein (Ed.), Useful theory: Making critical education practical (pp. 49-61).
New York: Peter Lang.
Aronowitz, S., Giroux, H. (1985). Education under siege. South Hadley, MA: Bergin-
Garvey.
Ballenger, B. (1992). Rethinking the research paper. Paper presented at the
Conference on College Composition and Communication.
Ballenger, B. (2007). The curious researcher: A guide to writing research papers (5th
ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.
Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 1, 164-180.
Bartlett, L. (2005). Book reviews. Comparative Education Review, 50(1), 164 - 166.
Berthoff, A. E. (1981). The making of meaning: Metaphors, models, and maxims for
writing teachers. Upper Montclair: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc.
Berthoff, A. E. (1982). Forming thinking writing: The composing imagination. Upper
Montclair: Boynton Cook Publishers, Inc.
Berthoff, A. E. (1990). The sense of learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
213
Bier, M. L. (2007). Inclusion for democracy: Who's in my classroom, and how do I teach
them? In R. A. Goldstein (Ed.), Useful theory: Making critical education practical
(pp. 169-179). New York: Peter Lang.
Boomer, R. (2000). Writing to think critically: The seeds of social action. Trends &
Issues in Secondary English, 109 - 121.
Borsheirm, C., & Petrone, R. (2006). Teaching the research paper for local action.
English Journal, 95(4), 78.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., and Walker, D. (1985). What is reflection in learning. In D. Boud,
Keogh, R., and Walker, D. (Ed.), Reflection: Turning experience into learning.
London: Kogan Page.
Bruner, J. (2006). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burke, J. (2003). Writing reminders: Tools, tips and techniques. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Bush, G. W. (2005, November 29). President tours border, discusses immigration
reform in Texas. Speech presented in El Paso, TX. Retrieved November 10,
2008, from http://georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051129-2.html.
Caillouet, R. R. (2006). Creating purpose and a renaissance in research. English
Journal, 95(4), 43.
Chapter 110. Texas essential knowledge and skills for English language arts and
reading: Subchapter c. high school. (1998). Retrieved November 10, 2008, from
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter110/index.html.
214
Childress, A. (1999). Mrs. James. In Glencoe literature: Course five (pp. 305). New
York: Glencoe McGraw-Hill.
Christensen, L. M. (2000). Critical literacy: Teaching reading, writing, and outrage.
Trends & Issues in Secondary English, 53-66.
Coleman, M. W. (1994). Using a collaborative learning project to teach information
literacy skills to twelfth grade regular English students. Unpublished practicum
report, Nova Southeastern University.
Community profile city of [Name], Texas: Demographics. (2006). Retrieved December
31, 2007.
Costigan, A. T., Crocco, M. S., & Zumwalt, K. K. (2004). Learning to teach in an age of
accountability. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cranton, P. (2002). Teaching for transformation. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 93, 63 - 72.
Cziko, C. (1996). Dialogue journals: Passing notes the academic way. In Cityscapes
(pp. 99 - 110). Berkeley, CA: National Writing Project.
Daggett, W. (2006). Rigor and relevance for all students. International center for
leadership in education, 2009
Demi. (1990). The empty pot. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Derrico, R. D. (2006). Guiding research: A collaborative approach. English Journal,
95(4), 10.
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.
Dewey, J. (1915). The school and society. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier.
215
Dickson, R., DeGraff, J., & Foard, M. (2002). Learning about self and others through
multi-genre research projects. English Journal, 92(2), 82.
[District name] local assessment handbook. (2008). 2008
Ehrenreich, B. (2001). Nickel and dimed: On (not) getting by in America. New York:
Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
Elbow, P. (2000). Everyone can write: Essays toward a hopeful theory of writing and
teaching writing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fairbanks, C. M. (1989). Reading, writing, and "real" research. English Journal, 78(5),
93.
Ford, J. E., Rees, S., and Ward, D. L. (1982). Research paper instruction:
Comprehensive bibliography of periodical sources, 1923 - 1980. Bulletin of
Bibliography, 84 -98.
Freeman, Y. S., & Freeman, D. E. (1992). Whole language for second language
learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freidman, T. (2008). Hot, flat, and crowded: Why we need a green revolution -- and
how it can renew America. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans. 30th Anniversary
Edition ed.). New York: Continuum.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Westport,
CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Gallagher, K. (2006). Teaching adolescent writers. Portland, MA: Stenhouse Publishers.
Giroux, H. (1997). Pedagogy and the politics of hope. Boulder, CO: WVestview Press.
216
Giroux, H. A. (1993). Living dangerously: Multiculturalism and the politics of difference
(Vol. 1). New York: Peter Lang.
Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (3rd ed.). Boston:
Pearson.
Golding, W. (1954). Lord of the flies. New York: Riverhead Books.
Goldstein, R. A. B., A. R. (2007). Introduction: Why a book on "useful theory"? What
makes theory "useful"? In R. A. Goldstein (Ed.), Useful theory: Making critical
education practical (pp. 1-11). New York: Peter Lang.
Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.
got milk? (2008). milkdelivers.org, 2008, from http://www.milkdelivers.org/got-milk-
campaign/
Greene, M. (1988). The dialect of freedom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Guinee, K., & Eagleton, M. B. (2006). Spinning straw into gold: Transforming
information into knowledge during web-based research. English Journal, 95(4),
46.
Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Doing case study research: A practical guide
for beginning researchers. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hasbrook, M. (2002). "Blah" or praxis? Reflection in Freirean pedagogy. Paper
presented at the NCTE.
How to write a great research paper. (2004). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hu, E. (2008). Texas teachers protest proposed curriculum guidelines. KVUE News
Team, 2008, from
217
http://www.kvue.com/news/hu/stories/032608kvueenglishteachers-
bm.227e120.html
Hughes, L. (1951). Theme for English B. Keith's poetry archive, 2008, from
http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~keith/poems/English_B.html
Hunt, T. J., & Hunt, B. (2006). Research and authority in an online world: Who knows?
who decides? English Journal, 95(4), 89.
Jackson, S. (2007). Freire re-viewed. Educational Theory, 57(2), 199 - 213.
Jago, C., & Gardner, S. (1999). How can high school and college teachers work
together to teach research strategies to students? English Journal, 89(1), 23.
K-12 alignment of ELAR TEKS approved on May 23, 2008 and posted on the TEA ELA
listserv on August 26, 2008. (2008). Coalition of English Language Arts
Organizations
Kaszyca, M., & Krueger, A. M. (1994). Collaborative voices: Reflections on the I-search
project. English Journal, 83(1), 62.
Kfretovics, J. R. (1985). Critical literacy: challenging the assumptions of mainstream
educational theory. Journal of Education, 167(2), 50 - 62.
Knobel, M. (2007). Forward. In Critical literacy: Context, research, and practice in the k-
12 classroom (pp. xi - xix). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publication.
Krashen, S. D. (2001). Incubation: A neglected aspect of the composing process? ESL
Journal, 4(2), 10 -11.
Lawrence, D. P. (1999). The community as text: Using the community for collaborative
Internet research. English Journal, 89(1), 56.
218
Liepolt, W. (2005). Updating the research paper. Learning and Leading with
Technology, 32(4), 30-33.
Luther, J. (2006). I-searching in context: Thinking critically about the research unit.
English Journal, 95(4), 68.
Lyman, H. (2006). I-search in the age of information. English Journal, 95(4), 62.
Mancina, H. (2005). Empowering students through a social-action writing project.
English Journal, 94(6), 31.
Marzano, R. J. (1991). Cultivating thinking in English and the language arts. Urbana, IL:
National Council of Teachers of English.
Mayer, J. (2006). Waiting for the world to change. In Continuum: Sony.
Mayo, P. (1955). Liberating praxis: Paulo Freire's legacy for radical education and
politics (pp. 37 - 72). Westport, CT: Praeger.
McColley, B. A., Kratohvil, N., Dreyfuss, J., Arni, S., Christenson, E. H., & et al. (1988).
Alternatives to the traditional research paper. English Journal, 77(6), 72.
McKenna, B., J., & McKenna, J., J. . (2000). Selecting topics for research writing
projects. English Journal, 89(6), 53.
McMurtry, K. (2001). E-cheating: Combating a 21st century challenge. T.H.E. Journal,
29, 36-38.
McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized
testing. New York: Routledge.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data
analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
219
Mitchell, G. J. (2007). Report to the commissioner of baseball of an independent
investigation into the illegal use of steroids and other performance enhancing
substances by players in major league baseball. Office of the Commission of
Baseball.
Moffett, J. (1983). Teaching the universe of discourse. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Moffett, J. (1988). Coming on center: Essays in English education. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Northrup, J. (1997). Pamphlets: An introduction to research techniques. English Journal,
86(6), 53.
Ohmann, R. (1996). English in America. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Pascarella, J. (2007). The manufacture of intent. In R. A. Goldstein (Ed.), Useful theory:
Making critical education practical (pp. 31-47). New York: Peter Lang.
Pegram, D. M. (2006). "What if?" Teaching research and creative-thinking skills through
proposal writing. English Journal, 95(4), 18.
Perry, A. E. (2003). Power point presentations: A creative addition to the research
process. English Journal, 92(6), 64.
Pfaffinger, K. A. (2006). Research paper baby steps. English Journal, 95(4), 75.
Phelps, T. O. (1992). Research or three-search? English Journal, 81(2), 76.
Pinar, W. F. (Ed.). (1998). The passionate mind of Maxine Greene: I am...not yet.
Bristol, PA: Flamer Press.
220
Pink, D. H. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right-brainers will rule the future. New York:
The Berkley Publishing Group.
Pipher, M. (2006). Writing to change the world: An inspiring guide for transforming the
world with words. New York: Riverhead Books.
Quinn, T. J. (2007). Caught in the act: Bonds failed amphetamine test. Retrieved
January 31, 2009, 2009
Research with a purpose. (1992). English Journal, 81(8), 59.
Rich, A. (1979). On lies, secrets, and silences. New York: Norton.
Richards, L. (2006). Teach-yourself NVivo7: The introductory tutorials. Retrieved
November 10, 2008, from
http://download.qsrinternational.com/Document/NVivo7/NVivo7_Tutorials_Lyn_Ri
chards.pdf.
Roberts, P. (2000). Education, literacy, and humanization: Exploring the work of Paulo
Freire. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Rossatto, C. A. (2005). Engaging Paulo Freire's pedagogy of possibility: From blind to
transformative optimism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Ruggieri, C. A. (2007). The issue of information: Making meaning in today's world.
English Journal, 96(4), 113.
Schlosser, E. (2001). Fast food nation. New York: Houghton Mufflin Company.
[School name] demographics. (2007). Retrieved December 31, 2007.
Shafer, G. (1999). Re-envisioning research. English Journal, 89(1), 45.
Shannon, P. (1993). Developing democratic voices. Distinguished educator series,
47(2), 86-94.
221
Shook, R. (1988). When worlds collide. Paper presented at the Conference on College
Composition and Communication.
Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Shor, I. (1997). What is critical literacy? Journal for Pedagogy, Pluralism & Practice,
1(4), online.
Shor, I. (2000). Introduction: (Why) education is politics. In I. P. Shor, C. (Ed.),
Education is politics: Critical teaching across differences, postsecondary (pp. 1-
14). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Slack, D. B. (2001). Fusing social justice with multigenre writing. English Journal, 90(6),
62.
Spurlock, M. (Writer) (2003). Super size me [Documentary].
Steineke, N. (2002). Reading and writing together: Collaborative literacy in action.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Styslinger, M. E. (2006). Multigenre-multigendered research papers. English Journal,
95(4), 53.
Sunderman, G. L., Kim, J. S., and Orfield, G. (2005). NCLB meets school realities:
Lessons from the field. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Szentkiralyi, E. (1996). Research papers and their pitfalls. English Journal, 85(1), 74.
Tyroff, C. (2008, July 16). Public testimony regarding the State Board of Education and
the adoption of the Texas essential knowledge and skills for English language
arts and reading. Coalition of English Language Arts Organizations. Speech
presented at the Texas House Education Committee Hearing. Retrieved
222
November 10, 2008, from Speech presented in El Paso, TX. Retrieved
November 10, 2008, from http://georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051129-2.html.
van Manen, M. (1982). Phenomenological pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 12(3), 283-
299.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wilhelm, J. (2007). Engaging readers and writers with inquiry: Scholastic.
Williams, C. (1993). Social action begins at school: The research paper revisited.
English Journal, 82(7), 44.
Wink, J. (1997). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world. New York: Longman.
Wirtz, J. (2006). Creating possibilities: Embedding research into creative writing. English
Journal, 95(4), 23.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed. Vol. 5). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.